On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 11:05 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Looking at the code:
>
> /* radix tree not lockless safe ! we use a brlock-type mecanism
> * for now, until we can use a lockless radix tree
> */
> static void irq_radix_wrlock(unsigned long *flags)
>
> The RCU radix tree stuffs have
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 11:05 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Anyway, it seems its the generic irq stuff that uses raw_spinlock_t and
> disables IRQs, so there isn't much we can do from the ARCH level I'm
> afraid :-(
>
> Ingo, any sane ideas?
Ok benh came up with a workable idea, he just needs a
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 10:10 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> Correct, -rt can't allocate -anything- when preemption if off. That is
> the cost for having the allocators itself preemptable.
>
> Even radix_tree_preload() will not work as its functionality was based
> on preempt disable to limit
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 10:10 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 08:12 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > And here is an updated patch. There has to be a better way than the
> > > #ifdef, but I need the two local variables, and breaking the intervening
> > > code out into
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 08:12 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > And here is an updated patch. There has to be a better way than the
> > #ifdef, but I need the two local variables, and breaking the intervening
> > code out into a separate function didn't quite seem right either.
> >
> >
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 08:12 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
And here is an updated patch. There has to be a better way than the
#ifdef, but I need the two local variables, and breaking the intervening
code out into a separate function didn't quite seem right either.
Thoughts?
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 10:10 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 08:12 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
And here is an updated patch. There has to be a better way than the
#ifdef, but I need the two local variables, and breaking the intervening
code out into a
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 10:10 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Correct, -rt can't allocate -anything- when preemption if off. That is
the cost for having the allocators itself preemptable.
Even radix_tree_preload() will not work as its functionality was based
on preempt disable to limit access
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 11:05 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Anyway, it seems its the generic irq stuff that uses raw_spinlock_t and
disables IRQs, so there isn't much we can do from the ARCH level I'm
afraid :-(
Ingo, any sane ideas?
Ok benh came up with a workable idea, he just needs a
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 11:05 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Looking at the code:
/* radix tree not lockless safe ! we use a brlock-type mecanism
* for now, until we can use a lockless radix tree
*/
static void irq_radix_wrlock(unsigned long *flags)
The RCU radix tree stuffs have gone
> And here is an updated patch. There has to be a better way than the
> #ifdef, but I need the two local variables, and breaking the intervening
> code out into a separate function didn't quite seem right either.
>
> Thoughts?
Nothing comes to mind right now...
> This one does only one oops
On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 07:48:45AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2007-11-11 at 09:45 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > Well, I suppose the patch could go in, maybe with some ifdef's
> > around
> > > the bits in _switch_to, there's little point in doing that on non-rt
> > >
On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 07:48:45AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2007-11-11 at 09:45 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > Well, I suppose the patch could go in, maybe with some ifdef's
> > around
> > > the bits in _switch_to, there's little point in doing that on non-rt
> > >
On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 07:48:45AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Sun, 2007-11-11 at 09:45 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
Well, I suppose the patch could go in, maybe with some ifdef's
around
the bits in _switch_to, there's little point in doing that on non-rt
kernels.
As
On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 07:48:45AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Sun, 2007-11-11 at 09:45 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
Well, I suppose the patch could go in, maybe with some ifdef's
around
the bits in _switch_to, there's little point in doing that on non-rt
kernels.
As
And here is an updated patch. There has to be a better way than the
#ifdef, but I need the two local variables, and breaking the intervening
code out into a separate function didn't quite seem right either.
Thoughts?
Nothing comes to mind right now...
This one does only one oops during
On Sun, 2007-11-11 at 09:45 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > Well, I suppose the patch could go in, maybe with some ifdef's
> around
> > the bits in _switch_to, there's little point in doing that on non-rt
> > kernels.
>
> As Nick Piggin already stated, and I'll even state it for the RT
>
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> > Removed this as well, also seemed to work. Please note, however, that
> > this is just running kernbench. But this did seem to get rid of some
> > of the warnings as well. ;-) Now only have the xics_startup() warning.
> >
> > >
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
Removed this as well, also seemed to work. Please note, however, that
this is just running kernbench. But this did seem to get rid of some
of the warnings as well. ;-) Now only have the xics_startup() warning.
Overall, looks fine
On Sun, 2007-11-11 at 09:45 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
Well, I suppose the patch could go in, maybe with some ifdef's
around
the bits in _switch_to, there's little point in doing that on non-rt
kernels.
As Nick Piggin already stated, and I'll even state it for the RT
kernel,
we do
> Removed this as well, also seemed to work. Please note, however, that
> this is just running kernbench. But this did seem to get rid of some
> of the warnings as well. ;-) Now only have the xics_startup() warning.
>
> > Overall, looks fine !
>
> I bet that there are more gotchas lurking
Removed this as well, also seemed to work. Please note, however, that
this is just running kernbench. But this did seem to get rid of some
of the warnings as well. ;-) Now only have the xics_startup() warning.
Overall, looks fine !
I bet that there are more gotchas lurking in there
On Saturday 10 November 2007 07:52, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > diff -urpNa -X dontdiff linux-2.6.23.1-rt4/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c
> > linux-2.6.23.1-rt4-fix/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c ---
> > linux-2.6.23.1-rt4/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c2007-10-12
> > 09:43:44.0
On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 07:52:04AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > diff -urpNa -X dontdiff linux-2.6.23.1-rt4/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c
> > linux-2.6.23.1-rt4-fix/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c
> > --- linux-2.6.23.1-rt4/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c2007-10-12
> >
> diff -urpNa -X dontdiff linux-2.6.23.1-rt4/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c
> linux-2.6.23.1-rt4-fix/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c
> --- linux-2.6.23.1-rt4/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c 2007-10-12
> 09:43:44.0 -0700
> +++ linux-2.6.23.1-rt4-fix/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c
On Saturday 10 November 2007 07:52, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
diff -urpNa -X dontdiff linux-2.6.23.1-rt4/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c
linux-2.6.23.1-rt4-fix/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c ---
linux-2.6.23.1-rt4/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c2007-10-12
09:43:44.0 -0700 +++
diff -urpNa -X dontdiff linux-2.6.23.1-rt4/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c
linux-2.6.23.1-rt4-fix/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c
--- linux-2.6.23.1-rt4/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c 2007-10-12
09:43:44.0 -0700
+++ linux-2.6.23.1-rt4-fix/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c 2007-11-08
On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 07:52:04AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
diff -urpNa -X dontdiff linux-2.6.23.1-rt4/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c
linux-2.6.23.1-rt4-fix/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c
--- linux-2.6.23.1-rt4/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c2007-10-12
09:43:44.0
28 matches
Mail list logo
