/cpuid.c |2 ++
[snip]
Though I am wondering what might be the usecase for microcode!
Guess we'll see that patch soon :-)
Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because
,
Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More
to thaw the task since it is
marked PF_NOFREEZE.
Avoid this problem by checking the current task's PF_NOFREEZE status in the
refrigerator before marking current as frozen.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
kernel/power/process.c |9 +
1 file changed, 9 insertions
to call try_to_freeze.
kthread_stop is one such case. flush_workqueue might be another.
This patch attempts to address such a situation with a fix for kthread_stop.
Strictly experimental. Compile tested on i386.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
include/asm-arm/thread_info.h
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 02:31:33PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 17:34:19 +0530
Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
flush_workqueue() just needs to die. I think there are (almost) no
legitimate users of it once cancel_work_sync() is merged.
This patch attempts
that flush_workqueue() needs to go, I guess, I am
ok with fixing only kthread_stop/kthread_should_stop for the moment.
Unless I can spot any other valid case :)
wake_up_process(k);
put_task_struct(k);
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India
in this case it does make sense :-)
Greetings,
Rafael
-
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:02:08PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 04/19, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Thursday, 19 April 2007 14:02, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
This patch fixes the race pointed out by Oleg Nesterov.
* Freezer marks a thread as freezeable.
* The thread now marks
On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 01:12:09AM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 04/19, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
@@ -63,12 +74,16 @@ void refrigerator(void)
recalc_sigpending(); /* We sent fake signal, clean it up */
spin_unlock_irq(current-sighand-siglock);
+ task_lock(current
))
+ clear_frozen_flag(k);
task_unlock(k);
+ }
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
-
To unsubscribe from
, TIF_FREEZE);
+ do_not_freeze(p);
We may want to rename do_not_freeze to something else. It kind of
looks weird calling do_not_freeze(p) after setting the frozen flag!
Probably, just a matter of taste :-)
}
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM
try_to_freeze.
If the task was marked for freezing, it will be frozen now.
You may want to check the thread http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/18/47
on how it came into existance.
Cheers,
Satyam
Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag
On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 10:39:56PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 04/23, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 01:12:09AM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 04/19, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
@@ -63,12 +74,16 @@ void refrigerator(void)
recalc_sigpending(); /* We sent
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 12:46:37AM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 04/23, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Monday, 23 April 2007 14:35, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
+ if (!freezer_should_exempt(current)) {
task_lock(k);
+ /* We are freezable, so we must make sure
, thanks for pointing that out.
That reminds me, shouldn't we set the child's TFF_FREEZE flag if the parent
is freezing or frozen?
Should I clear it in dup_task_struct() or is there a better place?
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes
for cpu-hotplug)
where we want to stop a frozen thread immediately after thawing it.
Something like
CPU_DEAD:
thaw_process(p);
kthread_stop(p);
p = NULL;
Is there a problem with this line of thinking ?
thanks and regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes
tested only on i386.
- Updated documentation for cpu-hotplug.
Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless
/CPU_UP_PREPARE in the
frozen context create any dirty dependencies in the future?
o Can the SYSTEM_RUNNING hack in _cpu_up be avoided by some cleaner means.
Signed-off-by : Srivatsa Vaddagiri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by : Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
include/linux/notifier.h |3
This patch reverts all the recent workqueue hacks added to make it
hotplug safe.
Signed-off-by : Srivatsa Vaddagiri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by : Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
kernel/workqueue.c | 225 +++--
1 files changed, 98
This patch removes the per-subsystem hotcpu mutexes from sched and
slab subsystems.
Signed-off-by : Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
kernel/sched.c | 16
mm/slab.c |6 --
2 files changed, 22 deletions(-)
Index: hotplug/kernel/sched.c
This patch rips out lock_cpu_hotplug from the kernel.
Good Riddance!! (hopefully :) )
Signed-off-by : Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
arch/i386/kernel/cpu/mtrr/main.c |6 --
arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c |8
arch/mips/kernel/mips-mt.c
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 10:43:35PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Hi,
On Wednesday, 14 February 2007 15:40, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
Hello Everybody,
This is an experiment towards process_freezer based implementation
of cpu-hotplug. This is mainly based on ideas of Andrew Morton
,
Rafael
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More
if there is a
need for the hierarchy.
Rafael
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe
of those spurious unlock_cpu_hotplug warnings.
Let me know if this fix works for you or not.
regards
gautham.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
kernel/cpu.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Index: linux-2.6.18/kernel/cpu.c
do kthread_stop() in CPU_DEAD itself (while processes
are frozen)? That would allow us to do everything from CPU_DEAD itself
(and not have CPU_DEAD_KILL_THREADS).
--
Regards,
vatsa
thanks
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag
On Sat, Feb 17, 2007 at 11:02:33AM +0530, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
This looks ok, but probably we could do it in a better way.
How about an api to thaw only a specific task something like
thaw_process(struct task_struct p).
I see that thaw_process already exists in freezer.h! Awesome!!
So
can cheerfully delete when we get
the freezer stuff done. Fortunately, Anil's patch will make it nice and
easy to find again.
Ok, I will make a note of this one.
If the IO-test results are good, I hope to post the patchset sometime
this week.
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
that #if above is
now broken. Actually it was probably always broken, but it just became
more so.
I have already removed it from in my version 3.
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still
by default.
From cpu-hotplug perspective, helper_wq was the only singlethreaded
non-freezeable workqueue.
Greetings,
Rafael
-
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom
On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 03:48:05PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 04/11, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 12:13:34PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
It should be calling try_to_freeze() somewhere anyway. We may need to
freeze
all tasks in some cases.
How
this
wait_for_completion as well as long as the thread A is not marked
PF_NOFREEZE. But with multiple freeze events, it won't be as simple as
that.
--
Regards,
vatsa
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility
see that it will fail in our case
where we might need to nest the try_to_freeze_tasks call.
Hmm, we don't have a rwlock variant that allows multiple writers, now do
we?!
Oleg.
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag
workaround.
So, I'll try running CPU_DOWN_PREPARE and CPU_UP_PREPARE from
a non frozen context to check if there are any potential problems.
Hopfully there shouldn't be (m)any!
Oleg.
thanks and regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag
workqueue (which is single threaded, so won't
be frozen anyway).
And a quick cscope scan shows that only the xfslogd and xfsdatad
are the only freezable workqueues. Any particular reason
for not marking rest of the non-single_threaded workqueues freezeable ??
thanks and regards
gautham
--
Gautham R
to silence these warnings, but I guess that
would open up some new races.
Greetings,
Rafael
regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
-
To unsubscribe from
are not kthread_stopping them anywhere.
So this kthread_stop waiting for parent(khelper_wq) which is blocked on
wait_for_complete(child-vfork_done) shouldn't occur. No?
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which
on, we are thawing processes
individually in CPU_DEAD before cleaning/stopping them.
I haven't observed any bad lockups/freeze chills with this approach.
But I need to test it a bit more before posting them.
regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes
.
Rafael, does that mean more status flags?!
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux
for not try_to_freeze()'ing the fakewriter and the reader
threads?? (Ok, I admit, I haven't looked into the code for the reason
which might be obvious.)
thanks
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain
based on the freeze events. Thus all
tasks which were previously marked PF_NOFREEZE are now
exempted from freezer using
freezer_exempt(FE_ALL);
which means exempt from all kinds of freezes.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Rafael J
This patch adds provision to make the process freezer reentrant
for different kinds of freeze events.
Credit to Rafael Wysocki for the system_freeze_event_mask idea.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED
in _cpu_up be avoided by some cleaner means.
Signed-off-by : Srivatsa Vaddagiri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by : Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by : Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
include/linux/freezer.h | 10 --
include/linux/notifier.h |2 -
include/linux
This patch rips out lock_cpu_hotplug from the kernel.
Good Riddance!! (hopefully :) )
Signed-off-by : Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
arch/i386/kernel/cpu/mtrr/main.c |6 --
arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c |8
arch/mips/kernel/mips-mt.c
Currently i386 and x86_64 __cpu_up uses the services of the kevents
workqueue to bring the cpu up. Change this and use kthread workqueue
instead which is single_threaded and won't be frozen during
CPU_HOTPLUG.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED
to flush_workqueue in vain, in a frozen context.
Note:
o The singlethreaded workqueues will not be frozen.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Oleg Nesterov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Johannes Berg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
include/linux/workqueue.h | 12 +---
kernel/workqueue.c
that all non-singlethreaded workqueues *have* to
be frozen to avoid any races.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Srivatsa Vaddagiri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Oleg Nesterov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
kernel/workqueue.c | 118 ++---
1
This patch makes all the kernel_threads (except the migration thread)
freezeable for cpu hotplug.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
arch/i386/kernel/apm.c |2 +-
drivers/block/loop.c|2 +-
drivers/char/apm-emulation.c|6
ambitious at this point of time. Atleast in my case it was :-)
The patchset is against 2.6.21-rc5-mm3.
Awaiting your feedback.
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom
On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 08:16:12AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Everybody,
This is another attempt towards process-freezer based cpu-hotplug.
This patchset covers just about everything that was discussed on the
LKML with respect
race conditions.
--
Regards,
vatsa
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux
(FE_ALL);
which means exempt from all kinds of freezes.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Actually no, I was not in cc.
Oops! Sorry. I knew I had
{
Rafael / Andrew,
Any reasons for leaving this hunk out?
I reran my tests with this hunk applied, and it work just fine.
Even 'make -j' the maximum time taken to hotplug a cpu was 0m2.16s.
Ingo
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India
.
Rafael / Andrew,
Any reasons for leaving this hunk out?
I will rerun my tests with this hunk applied and report back.
Ingo
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain
, freezer and hence hotplug succeeds even when I am running
a 'make -j' test.
--
Regards,
vatsa
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless
.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info
loop should do the trick.
Will get back soon.
Ingo
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 01:46:33PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 04/02, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
+/*
+ * Exempt the current process from being frozen for a certain event
+ */
+static inline void freezer_exempt(unsigned long exempt_freeze_event)
+{
+ if (exempt_freeze_event
On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 01:53:01PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 04/02, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
int freeze_processes(unsigned long freeze_event)
{
unsigned int nr_unfrozen;
-
+ int ret = 0;
+ mutex_lock(freezer_mutex);
+ if (system_freeze_event_mask freeze_event
On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 02:53:56PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 04/02, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
+ if (freeze_processes(FE_HOTPLUG_CPU)) {
+ thaw_processes(FE_HOTPLUG_CPU);
+ return -EBUSY;
+ }
Off-topic. This is a common pattern. Perhaps it makes sense
From: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 18:14:29 +0530
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] cpu-hotplug: Replace per-subsystem mutexes with
get_online_cpus()
This patch converts the known per-subsystem mutexes to get_online_cpus
put_online_cpus. It also eliminates the CPU_LOCK_ACQUIRE
From: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 18:14:29 +0530
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] cpu-hotplug: Replace lock_cpu_hotplug() with
get_online_cpus()
Replace all lock_cpu_hotplug/unlock_cpu_hotplug from the kernel and use
get_online_cpus and put_online_cpus instead as it highlights
From: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 18:14:20 +0530
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] cpu-hotplug: Refcount based Cpu Hotplug implementation
This patch implements a Refcount + Waitqueue based model for
cpu-hotplug.
Now, a thread which wants to prevent cpu-hotplug, will bump up
and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED
);
extern void cpu_maps_update_begin(void);
extern void cpu_maps_update_done(void);
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
.
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
commit 15bfb662b35c609490185fba2fd4713d230b9374
Author: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon Dec 10 13:41:45 2007 +0530
softlockup: remove get_online_cpus() which doesn't help here.
The get_online_cpus() protection seems to be bogus
in kernel/softlockup.c
for a sufficiently long time.
b) If the tasks have been migrated off, then we have nothing to check.
However, if we still want that particular cpu to not go offline during
the check, then could we use the following patch
commit a49736844717e00f7a37c96368cea8fec7eb31cf
Author: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL
On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 11:21:57AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i'm wondering, what's the proper CPU-hotplug safe sequence here
then? I'm picking a CPU number from cpu_online_map, and that CPU
could go away while i'm still using it, right
On Dec 10, 2007 4:58 PM, Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
say we've got 100 CPUs, so we've got 100 watchdog tasks running -
one for each CPU. Checking for hung tasks is a global operation not
a per-CPU operation (we iterate over
-of-bars.patch.
- git-sched was dropped due to breaking suspend-to-RAM.
Is it the same suspend-to-RAM problem that Jiri Slaby reported
here -- http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/12/7/125
The problem has been identified and a fix patch was provided.
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux
and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More
processing callbacks.
The discussion of the related theoretical race pointed out
by James Huang can be found here -- http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/11/20/603
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Dipankar Sarma [EMAIL PROTECTED
for
subsequently merging the preemptible RCU implementation.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Dipankar Sarma [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
include/linux/rcuclassic.h | 161
include/linux/rcupdate.h | 168
-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Dipankar Sarma [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
kernel/rcuclassic.c |2 +-
kernel/rcupdate.c | 10 ++
2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcuclassic.c b/kernel
to at compiler.
Also includes RCU tracing summarized in debugfs.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Dipankar Sarma [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
include/linux/rcuclassic.h |3
include/linux/rcupdate.h | 11
Preempt-RCU: CPU Hotplug handling
From: Paul E. McKenney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This patch allows preemptible RCU to tolerate CPU-hotplug operations.
It accomplishes this by maintaining a local copy of a map of online
CPUs, which it accesses under its own lock.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL
in the Reader Pipe list.
o Free-Block Circulation: Shows the number of torture structures
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 09:42:53PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Preempt-RCU: Update RCU Documentation.
From: Paul E. McKenney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This patch updates the RCU documentation to reflect preemptible RCU as
well as recent
Hi Steve,
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 12:36:47PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
Currently it is based against the latest linux-2.6-sched-devel.git
Awaiting your feedback!
Hi Gautham,
Thanks for posting this. I believe this is the same
fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel
in this context, since we've already
enabled the local interrupts and we're not in a preempt_disabled() ?
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 10:04:41AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
This is the version 2 of the refcount based cpu-hotplug locking
implementation.
Uggh. This introduces a global lock that has to be taken always when
scanning over cpus
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 04:29:12PM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
On Wednesday 17 October 2007 15:37:54 Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 10:47:41AM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
On Tuesday 16 October 2007 20:34:17 Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
This patch implements a Refcount
Hi Nathan,
Hi Gautham-
Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
Replace all lock_cpu_hotplug/unlock_cpu_hotplug from the kernel and use
get_online_cpus and put_online_cpus instead as it highlights
the refcount semantics in these operations.
Something other than get_online_cpus, please
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 03:22:21AM -0500, Nathan Lynch wrote:
Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
Hi Nathan,
Hi Gautham-
Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
Replace all lock_cpu_hotplug/unlock_cpu_hotplug from the kernel and use
get_online_cpus and put_online_cpus instead as it highlights
Hi Nathan,
Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 03:22:21AM -0500, Nathan Lynch wrote:
Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
Hi Nathan,
Hi Gautham-
Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
Replace all lock_cpu_hotplug/unlock_cpu_hotplug from the kernel and
use
and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More
On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 03:39:17PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 10/16, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
This patch converts the known per-subsystem cpu_hotplug mutexes to
get_online_cpus put_online_cpus.
It also eliminates the CPU_LOCK_ACQUIRE and CPU_LOCK_RELEASE hotplug
notification events
well
when it was stress tested with kernbench running while continuously
performing cpu-hotplug operations on i386, x86_64 and ppc64.
Awaiting your feedback.
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which
an ongoing cpu-hotplug operation are blocked
until the cpu-hotplug operation is over.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [For !CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU ]
---
include/linux/cpu.h |3 +
init/main.c |1
kernel/cpu.c
of the local data
structures. Hence the changes needs to be reviewed.
In case of pseries_add_processor/pseries_remove_processor, use
cpu_maps_update_begin()/cpu_maps_update_done() as we're modifying the
cpu_present_map there.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
arch/i386/kernel
This patch converts the known per-subsystem mutexes to get_online_cpus
put_online_cpus. It also eliminates the CPU_LOCK_ACQUIRE
and CPU_LOCK_RELEASE hotplug notification events.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
include/linux/notifier.h |4 +---
kernel/cpu.c
the accesses to the
workqueues list.
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
kernel/workqueue.c | 49 ++---
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6.23/kernel/workqueue.c
Update the documentation for cpu hotplug to reflect the use
of newly added API's get_online_cpus()/put_online_cpus();
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Documentation/cpu-hotplug.txt | 11 ++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6.23
Hello Rusty,
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 05:21:04PM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
On Wednesday 24 October 2007 15:37:16 Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
@@ -712,7 +712,7 @@ static void start_workqueue_thread(struc
if (p != NULL) {
if (cpu = 0)
- kthread_bind(p, cpu
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 05:38:18PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 10/24, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
(reordered)
With get_online_cpus()/put_online_cpus(), we can eliminate
the workqueue_mutex and reintroduce the workqueue_lock,
which is a spinlock which serializes the accesses
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 10:17:54PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 10/24, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 10:04:41AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
This is the version 2 of the refcount based cpu-hotplug locking
on DEBUG_KERNEL
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More
+ boost implementations.
+
config LKDTM
tristate Linux Kernel Dump Test Tool Module
depends on DEBUG_KERNEL
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless
On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 08:24:21AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 11:39:01AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
[snip]
+
+/*
+ * Return the list from which to boost target tasks.
+ * May only be invoked
1 - 100 of 944 matches
Mail list logo
