Re: Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-final-V0.7.51-12

2005-07-11 Thread William Weston
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Sun, 2005-07-10 at 17:43 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > I've also > > > released the -51-23 patch with these changes included. Does this fix > > > priority leakage on your SMP system? > > > > > > > -51-24 right? I'll give it a spin. > > >

Re: Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-final-V0.7.51-12

2005-07-10 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 2005-07-10 at 17:43 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > I've also > > > released the -51-23 patch with these changes included. Does this fix > > > priority leakage on your SMP system? > > > > > > > -51-24 right? I'll give it a spin. > >

Re: Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-final-V0.7.51-12

2005-07-10 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sun, 2005-07-10 at 17:43 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > I've also > > released the -51-23 patch with these changes included. Does this fix > > priority leakage on your SMP system? > > > > -51-24 right? I'll give it a spin. > a quick test seems to indicate it is indeed solved. -- Peter

Re: Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-final-V0.7.51-12

2005-07-10 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sun, 2005-07-10 at 17:10 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I can reproduce priority leakage on my SMP system; any userspace process > > > chrt'ed up and a lot will follow. This makes the system very > > > unresponsive when doing a make -j5. Verified

Re: Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-final-V0.7.51-12

2005-07-10 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I can reproduce priority leakage on my SMP system; any userspace process > > chrt'ed up and a lot will follow. This makes the system very > > unresponsive when doing a make -j5. Verified on 51-{6,18,23}. > > > > The following patch seems to fix it

Re: Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-final-V0.7.51-12

2005-07-10 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2005-07-09 at 23:24 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 13:12 -0700, William Weston wrote: > > On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > could you check whether the priority leakage happens if you disable SMP? > > > (if you can reproduce it easily) > > > > No pri

Re: Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-final-V0.7.51-12

2005-07-09 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 13:12 -0700, William Weston wrote: > On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > could you check whether the priority leakage happens if you disable SMP? > > (if you can reproduce it easily) > > No priority leakages have been seen with UP configs on any of the > machines

Re: Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-final-V0.7.51-12

2005-07-08 Thread William Weston
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Ingo Molnar wrote: > could you check whether the priority leakage happens if you disable SMP? > (if you can reproduce it easily) No priority leakages have been seen with UP configs on any of the machines I've been testing. The leakage is not hard to reproduce under SMT: s

Re: Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-final-V0.7.51-12

2005-07-08 Thread Chuck Harding
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Ingo Molnar wrote: * Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: tried it and cannot reproduce it, so i'll need the full backtrace of all tasks in your system, whenever sox gets stuck, via: managed to reproduce it via your script - and with RT_DEADLOCK_DETECT turned on the ci

Re: Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-final-V0.7.51-12

2005-07-08 Thread Ingo Molnar
* William Weston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -51-12 is still exhibhiting the RT priority leakage, but isn't > producing any BUG messages. could you check whether the priority leakage happens if you disable SMP? (if you can reproduce it easily) Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: s

Re: Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-final-V0.7.51-12

2005-07-08 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > tried it and cannot reproduce it, so i'll need the full backtrace of > all tasks in your system, whenever sox gets stuck, via: managed to reproduce it via your script - and with RT_DEADLOCK_DETECT turned on the circular deadlock was immediately detect

Re: Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-final-V0.7.51-12

2005-07-07 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Chuck Harding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Which still exhibits the lockup of sox. I built a 2.6.12 vanilla kernel > using the same .config as I used for 51-12 and the failure did not happen. > just the process of booting up causes later invocations of sox to lockup > in the D state. If I don't

Re: Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-final-V0.7.51-12

2005-07-07 Thread Chuck Harding
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Ingo Molnar wrote: * Steven Rostedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: is PCI_MSI enabled by any chance? That is known to break level-triggered IOAPIC irqs and devices. As a matter of fact it is... I'll turn it off now and try it out. If the commit is still going, I'll get you

Re: Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-final-V0.7.51-12

2005-07-07 Thread William Weston
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Ingo Molnar wrote: > is this inheritance perpetual? It is normal for some tasks to be boosted > momentarily, but if the condition remains even after jackd has exited, > it's clearly an anomaly. (lets call it "RT priority leakage".) Priority > leakage on SMP was fixed recentl