* Preempt Violation
@ 2004-07-17 0:06 Gabriel Devenyi
2004-07-17 0:50 ` Lee Revell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Gabriel Devenyi @ 2004-07-17 0:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ck, linux-kernel
This one looks particularly nasty.
20ms non-preemptible critical section violated 4 ms preempt threshold starting
a
t sys_ioctl+0x42/0x260 and ending at sys_ioctl+0xbd/0x260
[<c015881d>] sys_ioctl+0xbd/0x260
[<c0116510>] dec_preempt_count+0x110/0x120
[<c015881d>] sys_ioctl+0xbd/0x260
[<c0103e95>] sysenter_past_esp+0x52/0x71
--
Gabriel Devenyi
devenyga@mcmaster.ca
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Preempt Violation
2004-07-17 0:06 Preempt Violation Gabriel Devenyi
@ 2004-07-17 0:50 ` Lee Revell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Lee Revell @ 2004-07-17 0:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gabriel Devenyi; +Cc: ck, linux-kernel
On Fri, 2004-07-16 at 20:06, Gabriel Devenyi wrote:
> This one looks particularly nasty.
>
> 20ms non-preemptible critical section violated 4 ms preempt threshold starting
> a
> t sys_ioctl+0x42/0x260 and ending at sys_ioctl+0xbd/0x260
> [<c015881d>] sys_ioctl+0xbd/0x260
> [<c0116510>] dec_preempt_count+0x110/0x120
> [<c015881d>] sys_ioctl+0xbd/0x260
> [<c0103e95>] sysenter_past_esp+0x52/0x71
Yes, it looks like there are serious issues with ioctl.
Are you using either of the recent patches to fully daemonize softirqs?
This should help a lot. I am using this one:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2004/7/13/125
It applied against 2.6.8-mm1, with only one PPC-specific reject, I use
i386 so it doesn't matter.
Here is another:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2004/7/13/152
Have not tested yet.
Lee
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* RE: Preempt Violation
@ 2004-07-19 6:06 Zhu, Yi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Zhu, Yi @ 2004-07-19 6:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lee Revell, Gabriel Devenyi; +Cc: ck, linux-kernel
linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-07-16 at 20:06, Gabriel Devenyi wrote:
>> This one looks particularly nasty.
>>
>> 20ms non-preemptible critical section violated 4 ms preempt
>> threshold starting a
>
>> t sys_ioctl+0x42/0x260 and ending at sys_ioctl+0xbd/0x260
>> [<c015881d>] sys_ioctl+0xbd/0x260 [<c0116510>]
>> dec_preempt_count+0x110/0x120 [<c015881d>] sys_ioctl+0xbd/0x260
>> [<c0103e95>] sysenter_past_esp+0x52/0x71
>
> Yes, it looks like there are serious issues with ioctl.
>
> Are you using either of the recent patches to fully daemonize
> softirqs? This should help a lot. I am using this one:
>
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2004/7/13/125
>
> It applied against 2.6.8-mm1, with only one PPC-specific reject, I
> use i386 so it doesn't matter.
>
> Here is another:
>
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2004/7/13/152
>
> Have not tested yet.
>
> Lee
ioctl is called with the BKL held, which will disable preempt.
I don't think the patch helps.
Thanks,
-yi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-07-19 6:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-07-17 0:06 Preempt Violation Gabriel Devenyi
2004-07-17 0:50 ` Lee Revell
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-07-19 6:06 Zhu, Yi
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox