sk is same as the current one, then there is no need to go on ?
cpus_equal(watchdog_cpumask, watchdog_cpumask_for_smpboot) or something else ?
> + smpboot_update_cpumask_percpu_thread(_threads,
> + watchdog_cpum
?
+ watchdog_threads.cpumask = watchdog_cpumask_for_smpboot;
+
+ /* Another cpumask is allocated for /proc to use. */
+ alloc_cpumask_var(watchdog_cpumask, GFP_KERNEL);
ditto
thanks
chai wen
+ watchdog_cpumask_bits = cpumask_bits(watchdog_cpumask);
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL
On 01/09/2015 11:34 AM, Cyril Bur wrote:
> This permits the use of arch specific clocks for which virtualised kernels can
> use their notion of 'running' time, not the elpased wall time which will
s/elpased/elapsed/
thanks
chai wen
> include host execution time.
>
> Signed-of
On 01/09/2015 11:34 AM, Cyril Bur wrote:
This permits the use of arch specific clocks for which virtualised kernels can
use their notion of 'running' time, not the elpased wall time which will
s/elpased/elapsed/
thanks
chai wen
include host execution time.
Signed-off-by: Cyril Bur
On 10/27/2014 07:54 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 08:26:54AM +0100, Chai Wen wrote:
>> Hi Will
>>
>> Ping...
>
> Sorry, I was on holiday for the latter part of last week. I've applied this
> locally and I'll send it via rmk for 3.19, as I d
On 10/27/2014 07:54 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 08:26:54AM +0100, Chai Wen wrote:
Hi Will
Ping...
Sorry, I was on holiday for the latter part of last week. I've applied this
locally and I'll send it via rmk for 3.19, as I don't think it's urgent.
Got it.
Thanks
Hi Will
Ping...
thanks
chai wen
On 10/22/2014 08:16 PM, chai wen wrote:
> Idx sanity check was once implemented separately in these counter
> handling functions and then return value was treated as a judgement.
> armv7_pmnc_select_counter()
> armv7_pmnc_en
Hi Will
Ping...
thanks
chai wen
On 10/22/2014 08:16 PM, chai wen wrote:
Idx sanity check was once implemented separately in these counter
handling functions and then return value was treated as a judgement.
armv7_pmnc_select_counter()
armv7_pmnc_enable_counter
On 10/22/2014 08:31 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 01:16:49PM +0100, chai wen wrote:
>> Idx sanity check was once implemented separately in these counter
>> handling functions and then return value was treated as a judgement.
>> armv
-by: chai wen
---
arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c | 40 +-
1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c b/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c
index 116758b..aaf5314 100644
--- a/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c
+++ b
On 10/22/2014 06:47 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 09:21:46AM +0100, chai wen wrote:
>> Idx sanity check was once implemented separately in these counter handling
>> functions and then return value was treated as a judgement.
>>
On 10/22/2014 07:01 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 09:21:47AM +0100, chai wen wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: chai wen
>> ---
>> arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c | 52
>> +-
>> 1 files changed, 13
()
armv7_pmnc_disable_intens()
But we do not need to do this now, and the return of idx is useless.
Signed-off-by: chai wen
---
arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c | 32 ++--
1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c b/arch/arm
Signed-off-by: chai wen
---
arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c | 52 +-
1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c b/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c
index f66a9b8..6c088e8 100644
--- a/arch/arm/kernel
On 10/22/2014 08:31 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 01:16:49PM +0100, chai wen wrote:
Idx sanity check was once implemented separately in these counter
handling functions and then return value was treated as a judgement.
armv7_pmnc_select_counter
Signed-off-by: chai wen chaiw.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c | 52 +-
1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c b/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c
index f66a9b8..6c088e8 100644
()
armv7_pmnc_disable_intens()
But we do not need to do this now, and the return of idx is useless.
Signed-off-by: chai wen chaiw.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c | 32 ++--
1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel
On 10/22/2014 07:01 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 09:21:47AM +0100, chai wen wrote:
Signed-off-by: chai wen chaiw.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c | 52
+-
1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 39 deletions
On 10/22/2014 06:47 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 09:21:46AM +0100, chai wen wrote:
Idx sanity check was once implemented separately in these counter handling
functions and then return value was treated as a judgement.
armv7_pmnc_select_counter
...@arm.com
Signed-off-by: chai wen chaiw.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c | 40 +-
1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c b/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c
index 116758b..aaf5314 100644
On 08/26/2014 10:22 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 08:51:30PM +0800, Chai Wen wrote:
>> On 08/22/2014 09:58 AM, Don Zickus wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 01:42:22PM +0800, chai wen wrote:
>>>> For now, soft lockup detector
On 08/22/2014 09:58 AM, Don Zickus wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 01:42:22PM +0800, chai wen wrote:
>> For now, soft lockup detector warns once for each case of process softlockup.
>> But the thread 'watchdog/n' may not always get the cpu at the time slot
>> between
>
On 08/22/2014 09:58 AM, Don Zickus wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 01:42:22PM +0800, chai wen wrote:
For now, soft lockup detector warns once for each case of process softlockup.
But the thread 'watchdog/n' may not always get the cpu at the time slot
between
the task switch of two processes
On 08/26/2014 10:22 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 08:51:30PM +0800, Chai Wen wrote:
On 08/22/2014 09:58 AM, Don Zickus wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 01:42:22PM +0800, chai wen wrote:
For now, soft lockup detector warns once for each case of process
softlockup
On 08/21/2014 01:42 PM, chai wen wrote:
> For now, soft lockup detector warns once for each case of process softlockup.
> But the thread 'watchdog/n' may not always get the cpu at the time slot
> between
> the task switch of two processes hogging that cpu to reset soft_w
On 08/21/2014 01:42 PM, chai wen wrote:
For now, soft lockup detector warns once for each case of process softlockup.
But the thread 'watchdog/n' may not always get the cpu at the time slot
between
the task switch of two processes hogging that cpu to reset soft_watchdog_warn.
An example
there may
be a different process that is going to hog the cpu. Resolve this by
saving/checking the task pointer of the hogging process and use that to reset
soft_watchdog_warn too.
Signed-off-by: chai wen
Signed-off-by: Don Zickus
---
kernel/watchdog.c | 16 +++-
1 files changed, 15 insert
On 08/19/2014 09:36 AM, Chai Wen wrote:
> On 08/19/2014 04:38 AM, Don Zickus wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 09:02:00PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>>
>>> * Don Zickus wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> So I agree with the motivation of this imp
On 08/19/2014 09:36 AM, Chai Wen wrote:
On 08/19/2014 04:38 AM, Don Zickus wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 09:02:00PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Don Zickus dzic...@redhat.com wrote:
So I agree with the motivation of this improvement, but
is this implementation namespace-safe?
What
process that is going to hog the cpu. Resolve this by
saving/checking the task pointer of the hogging process and use that to reset
soft_watchdog_warn too.
Signed-off-by: chai wen chaiw.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Don Zickus dzic...@redhat.com
---
kernel/watchdog.c | 16
about using pid here with namespace.
But as to the pointer of process, is there a chance that we got a 'historical'
address saved in the 'softlockup_warn_pid(or address)_saved' and the current
hogging process happened to get the same task pointer address?
If it never happens, I think the comparing of
Commit-ID: f530504a063cfa028971e4b26ea8e0c32908de25
Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/f530504a063cfa028971e4b26ea8e0c32908de25
Author: chai wen
AuthorDate: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:49:23 -0400
Committer: Ingo Molnar
CommitDate: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 11:17:46 +0200
watchdog: Remove unnecessary
Commit-ID: f530504a063cfa028971e4b26ea8e0c32908de25
Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/f530504a063cfa028971e4b26ea8e0c32908de25
Author: chai wen chaiw.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
AuthorDate: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:49:23 -0400
Committer: Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org
CommitDate: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 11:17
think the comparing of address is ok.
thanks
chai wen
Cheers,
Don
.
--
Regards
Chai Wen
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please
On 08/05/2014 11:20 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 10:47:57AM +0800, Chai Wen wrote:
>> On 08/04/2014 10:31 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 03:36:19PM +0800, chai wen wrote:
>>>>
>>>> For now, soft loc
On 08/05/2014 11:20 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 10:47:57AM +0800, Chai Wen wrote:
On 08/04/2014 10:31 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 03:36:19PM +0800, chai wen wrote:
For now, soft lockup detector warns once for each case of process
softlockup
On 08/04/2014 10:31 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 03:36:19PM +0800, chai wen wrote:
>>
>> For now, soft lockup detector warns once for each case of process softlockup.
>> But the thread 'watchdog/n' may can not always get cpu at the time slot
>>
there may be
a different process that is going to hog the cpu. Is is better for detector to
be aware of it.
Signed-off-by: chai wen
---
kernel/watchdog.c | 18 --
1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
index 4c2e11c..9080
Signed-off-by: chai wen
---
kernel/watchdog.c |5 -
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
index c3319bd..4c2e11c 100644
--- a/kernel/watchdog.c
+++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
@@ -15,11 +15,6 @@
#include
#include
#include
Signed-off-by: chai wen chaiw.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
kernel/watchdog.c |5 -
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
index c3319bd..4c2e11c 100644
--- a/kernel/watchdog.c
+++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
@@ -15,11 +15,6 @@
#include
be
a different process that is going to hog the cpu. Is is better for detector to
be aware of it.
Signed-off-by: chai wen chaiw.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
kernel/watchdog.c | 18 --
1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
index
On 08/04/2014 10:31 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 03:36:19PM +0800, chai wen wrote:
For now, soft lockup detector warns once for each case of process softlockup.
But the thread 'watchdog/n' may can not always get cpu at the time slot
between
the task switch of two processes
. And it works as I see some async_pf happening and the vm works well.
But I do not know the exact occasion of the async_pf happening.
Thanks.
Suggested-by: Gleb Natapov
Signed-off-by: Gu zheng
Signed-off-by: chai wen
---
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c |4 ++--
include/linux/kvm_host.h |2
On 10/14/2013 05:14 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 05:06:42PM +0800, chai wen wrote:
>> Hi Gleb
>> Thanks for you comment.
>> this new patch is based on git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git
>> queue branch.
>> Page pinning is not man
guests process that is waitting on a page.
So drop the FOLL_GET flag in GUP, and do some simplifying in async_pf
check/clear processing.
thanks.
Suggested-by: Gleb Natapov
Signed-off-by: Gu zheng
Signed-off-by: chai wen
---
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c |4 ++--
include/linux/kvm_host.h |2
guests process that is waitting on a page.
So drop the FOLL_GET flag in GUP, and do some simplifying in async_pf
check/clear processing.
thanks.
Suggested-by: Gleb Natapov g...@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Gu zheng guz.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: chai wen chaiw.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
arch/x86
On 10/14/2013 05:14 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 05:06:42PM +0800, chai wen wrote:
Hi Gleb
Thanks for you comment.
this new patch is based on git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git
queue branch.
Page pinning is not mandatory in kvm async_pf processing and probably
. And it works as I see some async_pf happening and the vm works well.
But I do not know the exact occasion of the async_pf happening.
Thanks.
Suggested-by: Gleb Natapov g...@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Gu zheng guz.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: chai wen chaiw.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
arch/x86/kvm
On 10/10/2013 11:15 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 09:20:15PM +0800, chai wen wrote:
>> Hi Gleb
>>
>> Thanks for you explanation about async_pf in kvm.
>> Page pinning is not mandatory in kvm async_pf processing and probably should
>>
On 10/10/2013 11:15 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 09:20:15PM +0800, chai wen wrote:
Hi Gleb
Thanks for you explanation about async_pf in kvm.
Page pinning is not mandatory in kvm async_pf processing and probably should
be dropped later.this patch drops the FOLL_GET flag
structure to simplify some following async_pf check/clear processing.
Thanks.
Suggested-by: g...@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: chai wen
---
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c |5 ++---
include/linux/kvm_host.h |2 +-
virt/kvm/async_pf.c | 16 ++--
3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 14
On 10/08/2013 03:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 02:58:22PM +0800, chai wen wrote:
>> On 10/02/2013 12:04 AM, chaiwen wrote:
>>> On 09/30/2013 08:51 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 06:03:07PM +0800, chai wen wrote:
>>>
On 10/08/2013 03:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 02:58:22PM +0800, chai wen wrote:
On 10/02/2013 12:04 AM, chaiwen wrote:
On 09/30/2013 08:51 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 06:03:07PM +0800, chai wen wrote:
Hi all
Async page fault in kvm currently pin
structure to simplify some following async_pf check/clear processing.
Thanks.
Suggested-by: g...@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: chai wen chaiw.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c |5 ++---
include/linux/kvm_host.h |2 +-
virt/kvm/async_pf.c | 16 ++--
3 files changed
Hi all
Async page fault in kvm currently pin user pages via get_user_pages.
when doing page migration,the method can be found via
page->mmapping->a_ops->migratepage to offline old pages and migrate to
new pages. As to anonymous page there is no file mapping but a anon_vma.So
the migration will
Hi all
Async page fault in kvm currently pin user pages via get_user_pages.
when doing page migration,the method can be found via
page-mmapping-a_ops-migratepage to offline old pages and migrate to
new pages. As to anonymous page there is no file mapping but a anon_vma.So
the migration will fall
56 matches
Mail list logo
