From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: gregkh@suse.de,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: tty breakage in X (Was: tty vs workqueue oddities)
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 10:56:14 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1307062574.29297.204.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110602110727.7343782b@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
On Thu, 2011-06-02 at 11:07 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 18:37:01 +1000
> Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2011-06-02 at 17:17 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > Hi Alan !
> >
> > Hrm... looks like Alan is innocent ... interesting tho, the culprit
> > patch looks like something he (or somebody known to understand the tty
> > code :-) should have reviewed.
>
> I did review it, and ran it and it worked beautifully on my system 8)
>
> I do wonder if it has an interaction with Linus earlier changes to queue
> flushing as I've never tested both together.
I just noticed it doesn't happen (or if it does, it recovers fast enough
to not be noticable) on an SMP machine (dual G5). However, if I boot the
same machine with maxcpus=1, the problem is back. A simple "dmesg" in
gnome terminal shows it.
However, on that much faster machine, it also recovers a lot faster. On
the powerbook, it hangs a few minutes, on the G5 it hangs a few seconds.
I don't have the bandwidth to dive into the workqueue/tty before this
week-end, I'll give it a shot next week if nobody beats me to it.
Cheers,
Ben.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-03 0:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-02 7:17 tty vs workqueue oddities Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-06-02 8:37 ` tty breakage in X (Was: tty vs workqueue oddities) Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-06-02 9:30 ` Andreas Schwab
2011-06-02 10:07 ` Alan Cox
2011-06-03 0:56 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2011-06-03 6:17 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-06-03 6:56 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-06-03 9:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-06-05 14:37 ` Guillaume Chazarain
2011-06-06 14:24 ` Guillaume Chazarain
2011-06-08 2:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-06-08 3:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-06-08 8:31 ` Guillaume Chazarain
2011-06-08 8:28 ` Felipe Balbi
2011-06-08 9:04 ` Alan Cox
2011-06-02 10:03 ` tty vs workqueue oddities Alan Cox
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-06-03 10:23 tty breakage in X (Was: tty vs workqueue oddities) Milton Miller
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=1307062574.29297.204.camel@pasglop \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=balbi@ti.com \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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