[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH][RESEND]RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Fix softlockup issue after vcpu hotplug


  • To: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 01:23:07 +0000
  • Delivery-date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 17:22:48 -0800
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
  • Thread-index: AcdESFqDCWsISfq5RGeHgxcxVzRqmQACelaDAAAZiDAAAP4q2wADxf1QAAFVV3AAAMUYXAAACCkwAACFZyAAAV9OMAABEoucACBxTEAATS41lQANfeFwAACGefI=
  • Thread-topic: [PATCH][RESEND]RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Fix softlockup issue after vcpu hotplug

On 2/2/07 01:10, "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> So, am I looking at wrong code? In 2.6.16:
> while (!kthread_should_stop()) {
>                 msleep_interruptible(1000);
>                 touch_softlockup_watchdog();
>         }
> 
> While in 2.6.18:
> while (!kthread_should_stop()) {
>                 set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
>                 touch_softlockup_watchdog();
>                 schedule();
>         }
> 
> I don't think same logic kept there. :-)

Fair point! I must have compared two 2.6.16 trees...

Well, that is interesting. I have no idea how SCHED_FIFO/sched_priority=99
interacts with timer wheels and/or tickless idle modes. I wonder why this
was changed at all? Perhaps a question for lkml...

 -- Keir



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.