From: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH -rt] irqd starvation on SMP by a single process?
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 10:47:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1147456061.9343.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060512055025.GA25824@elte.hu>
On Fri, 2006-05-12 at 07:50 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > + if(!cpus_equal(current->cpus_allowed, irq_affinity[irq]));
> > + set_cpus_allowed(current, irq_affinity[irq]);
>
> > The patch below appears to correct this issue, however it also
> > repeatedly(on different irqs) causes the following BUG:
>
> ah. This actually uncovered a real bug. We were calling __do_softirq()
> with interrupts enabled (and being preemptible) - which is certainly
> bad.
>
> this was hidden before because the smp_processor_id() debugging code
> handles tasks bound to a single CPU as per-cpu-safe.
>
> could you check the (totally untested) patch below and see if that fixes
> things for you? I've also added your affinity change.
Yep, no BUG messages and I get irq affinity behavior that matches what I
echo into the proc interface.
Looks good to me so far. I'll keep running w/ it and let you know if we
see any issues.
thanks
-john
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-05-12 17:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-05-12 2:43 [RFC][PATCH -rt] irqd starvation on SMP by a single process? john stultz
2006-05-12 5:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-05-12 7:59 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-05-12 8:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-05-12 11:39 ` Mark Hounschell
2006-05-12 11:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-05-12 11:59 ` Mark Hounschell
2006-05-12 12:53 ` Mark Hounschell
2006-05-12 13:03 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-05-12 13:06 ` Mark Hounschell
2006-05-12 13:19 ` Mark Hounschell
2006-05-12 17:47 ` john stultz [this message]
2006-05-12 18:04 ` john stultz
2006-05-12 19:16 ` Mark Hounschell
2006-05-12 20:04 ` Mark Hounschell
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-05-12 4:22 Edward Killips
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1147456061.9343.12.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox