From: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@redhat.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: Large slowdown with 'x86: Avoid invoking RCU when CPU is idle'
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 20:42:43 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120222014242.GF23186@zod.bos.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120222013252.GZ2375@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 05:32:52PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 08:16:53PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > Over in Fedora land, I applied your patch from this thread:
> >
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/1/24/441
> >
> > to our 3.3-rc3/rc4 based rawhide kernels. The intention was to solve an
> > RCU issue that was very similar to what Eric originally reported, and
> > the RCU splat did indeed go away[1].
> >
> > However, we then got a few reports of kernels containing that patch
> > being extremely slow. When the patch was dropped, the slowness goes
> > away according to one reporter. The details can be found in this bug:
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795050
> >
> > The slowness doesn't seem to hit everyone, and in my local testing
> > things seem to be working just fine. The reporters have widely varying
> > hardware as well, so it doesn't seem machine specific.
> >
> > Perhaps I misdiagnosed the original issue, or perhaps I missed something
> > else that needs to be applied prior to this but I thought I would point
> > this out in case you had any ideas.
First off, thanks for the quick reply!
> This patch has been obsoleted by patches #45-47 in this series:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/3/459
Holy lots of patches...
> And patch #47 in that series has been obsoleted by another series
> from Steven Rostedt:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/7/231
Ok.
> Hopefully these fix both splats and slowness.
So again, I'm slightly confused on how RCU patches flow. Eric
originally reported the bug for which you created the patch I applied
against 3.3. The giant patch series above seems queued for 3.4.
I don't see stable CC'd on 45-47, nor any of Steven's patches. I doubt
I'd want to go applying the 47-patch series on 3.3 at the moment, and
given you have these marked for 3.4 I don't think you do either.
However, is there some kind of fix for the original bug report against
3.3?
josh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-22 1:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-22 1:16 Large slowdown with 'x86: Avoid invoking RCU when CPU is idle' Josh Boyer
2012-02-22 1:32 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-22 1:42 ` Josh Boyer [this message]
2012-02-24 14:40 ` Josh Boyer
2012-02-24 16:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-24 16:27 ` Josh Boyer
2012-02-24 16:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-02-24 17:20 ` Steven Rostedt
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=20120222014242.GF23186@zod.bos.redhat.com \
--to=jwboyer@redhat.com \
--cc=kernel-team@fedoraproject.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/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