Am Samstag, den 31.10.2015, 14:54 +0100 schrieb Richard Weinberger: > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 7:23 AM, Anton Ivanov > <anton.iva...@kot-begemot.co.uk> wrote: > > I got the first patchset to build, it works very well on a single > > core > > host or with CPU pinning of the UML - the performance gain is > > > 25%. > > > > However, I introduced a race somewhere along the way - it crashes > > UML > > reliably if you do not pin CPUs. > > How does the crash look like? > I see also an issue with that patch, after UML has an uptime of a few > minutes > a task which does nanosleep() will never wake up. > > [<000000006001a29d>] __switch_to+0x53/0x82 > [<00000000602995d2>] __schedule+0x2f4/0x3f7 > [<0000000060299751>] schedule+0x7c/0x95 > [<000000006029b871>] do_nanosleep+0x8b/0x134 > [<0000000060068a41>] hrtimer_nanosleep+0xb2/0x15a > [<0000000060068b90>] SyS_nanosleep+0xa7/0xbf > [<000000006001d492>] handle_syscall+0x6a/0x84 > [<00000000600304a8>] userspace+0x3d8/0x463 > [<000000006001a180>] fork_handler+0x85/0x87 > [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff >
Hi, is this crash/hang about the "switch clocksource to hrtimers" patch or about the next patch that improves UBD improvements? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
