On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 23:20 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Tuesday 24 April 2007 22:52:27 Daniel Walker wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 13:24 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> >
> > > And sched_clock's use of local_irq_save/restore appears to be absolutely
> > > correct, so I think it must be tr
On Tuesday 24 April 2007 22:52:27 Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 13:24 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
> > And sched_clock's use of local_irq_save/restore appears to be absolutely
> > correct, so I think it must be triggering a bug in either the self-tests
> > or lockdep itself.
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:59:18 +0200 Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> * Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 13:24 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> >
> > > And sched_clock's use of local_irq_save/restore appears to be absolutely
> > > correct, so I thi
* Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 13:24 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
> > And sched_clock's use of local_irq_save/restore appears to be absolutely
> > correct, so I think it must be triggering a bug in either the self-tests
> > or lockdep itself.
>
> Why d
On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 22:59 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 13:24 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> >
> > > And sched_clock's use of local_irq_save/restore appears to be absolutely
> > > correct, so I think it must be triggering
On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 13:24 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> And sched_clock's use of local_irq_save/restore appears to be absolutely
> correct, so I think it must be triggering a bug in either the self-tests
> or lockdep itself.
Why does sched_clock need to disable interrupts?
Daniel
-
To u
Andrew Morton wrote:
> It's weird. And I don't think the locking selftest code calls
> sched_clock() (or any other time-related thing) at all, does it?
>
I guess it ends up going through the scheduler, which does use it.
But...
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscri
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 13:00:49 -0700 Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>
>> Andrew Morton wrote:
>>
>>> Well, it _is_ mysterious.
>>>
>>> Did you try to locate the code which failed? I got lost in macros and
>>> include files, and gave up very very ea
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 13:24:24 -0700 Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> >> Well, it _is_ mysterious.
> >>
> >> Did you try to locate the code which failed? I got lost in macros and
> >> include files, and gave up very very
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
>
>> Well, it _is_ mysterious.
>>
>> Did you try to locate the code which failed? I got lost in macros and
>> include files, and gave up very very easily. Stop hiding, Ingo.
>>
>>
>
> OK, I've managed to reproduce it. Removing the loca
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 13:00:49 -0700 Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Well, it _is_ mysterious.
> >
> > Did you try to locate the code which failed? I got lost in macros and
> > include files, and gave up very very easily. Stop hiding, Ingo.
> >
>
> OK
Andrew Morton wrote:
> Well, it _is_ mysterious.
>
> Did you try to locate the code which failed? I got lost in macros and
> include files, and gave up very very easily. Stop hiding, Ingo.
>
OK, I've managed to reproduce it. Removing the local_irq_save/restore
from sched_clock() makes it go
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 11:16:09 -0700 Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > I said that because the damn thing went away when I was hunting it down
> > because I lost the config and was unable to remember the right combination
> > of debug settings. Fortunately i
Andrew Morton wrote:
> I said that because the damn thing went away when I was hunting it down
> because I lost the config and was unable to remember the right combination
> of debug settings. Fortunately it later came back so I took care to
> preserve the config.
>
sched_clock doesn't *do* an
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:51:35 -0700 Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > It seems fairly sensitive to .config settings. See
> > http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/config-sony.txt
> >
>
> I haven't tried your config yet, but I haven't managed to reproduce it
>
Andrew Morton wrote:
> It seems fairly sensitive to .config settings. See
> http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/config-sony.txt
>
I haven't tried your config yet, but I haven't managed to reproduce it
by playing with the usual suspects in my config (SMP, PREEMPT). Any
idea about which config chan
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 23:58:20 -0700 Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:49:20 -0700 Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >> The softlockup watchdog is currently a nuisance in a virtual machine,
> >> since the
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:49:20 -0700 Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>
>> The softlockup watchdog is currently a nuisance in a virtual machine,
>> since the whole system could have the CPU stolen from it for a long
>> period of time. While it would be un
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:49:20 -0700 Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> The softlockup watchdog is currently a nuisance in a virtual machine,
> since the whole system could have the CPU stolen from it for a long
> period of time. While it would be unlikely for a guest domain to be
>
The softlockup watchdog is currently a nuisance in a virtual machine,
since the whole system could have the CPU stolen from it for a long
period of time. While it would be unlikely for a guest domain to be
denied timer interrupts for over 10s, it could happen and any softlockup
message would be co
20 matches
Mail list logo
