From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: ccb@acm.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] increase spinlock-debug looping timeouts from 1 sec to 1 min
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 13:39:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060619113943.GA18321@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060619021314.a6ce43f5.akpm@osdl.org>
* Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> wrote:
> > The write_trylock + __delay in the loop is not a problem or a bug, as
> > the trylock will at most _increase_ the delay - and our goal is to not
> > have a false positive, not to be absolutely accurate about the
> > measurement here.
>
> Precisely. We have delays of over a second (but we don't know how
> much more than a second). Let's say two seconds. The NMI watchdog
> timeout is, what? Five seconds?
i dont see the problem. We'll have tried that lock hundreds of thousands
of times before this happens. The NMI watchdog will only trigger if we
do this with IRQs disabled. And it's not like the normal
__write_lock_failed codepath would be any different: for heavily
contended workloads the overhead is likely in the cacheline bouncing,
not in the __delay().
> That's getting too close. The result will be a total system crash.
> And RH are shipping this.
I dont see a connection. Pretty much the only thing the loop condition
impacts is the condition under which we print out a 'i think we
deadlocked' message. Have i missed your point perhaps?
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-06-19 11:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-06-12 19:53 BUG: write-lock lockup Charles C. Bennett, Jr.
2006-06-17 17:07 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-19 7:02 ` [patch] increase spinlock-debug looping timeouts from 1 sec to 1 min Ingo Molnar
2006-06-19 7:59 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-19 8:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-06-19 8:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-06-19 8:32 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-19 8:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-06-19 9:13 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-19 11:39 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2006-06-19 19:55 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-20 8:06 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-06-20 8:40 ` [patch] fix spinlock-debug looping Ingo Molnar
2006-06-20 8:52 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-20 9:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-06-20 9:32 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-20 9:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-06-20 16:02 ` Dave Olson
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=20060619113943.GA18321@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=ccb@acm.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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