Re: 2.6.4 on Alpha uninterruptible sleep of processes

From: Marc Giger (gigerstyle_at_gmx.ch)
Date: 03/13/04

  • Next message: Anton Blanchard: "[PATCH] fix NUMA compile with large cpumasks" 
    Date:	Sat, 13 Mar 2004 11:10:21 +0100
To: Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru>

    Hi Ivan,

    On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 02:01:41 +0300
    Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru> wrote:

    > On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 09:52:15PM +0100, Marc Giger wrote:
    > > Right now I'm recompiling the kernel. So you say this patch isn't a
    > > fix but a test?
    >
    > Yes. That patch just reverts new alpha semaphore stuff which went
    > into 2.6.4.
    >
    > > This time I have additionally "semaphore debugging" enabled,
    > > perhaps it's useful for you.
    >
    > Thanks, this might be helpful.

    Hmm, I couldn't boot the kernel with enabled "semaphore debugging". It
    hangs directly after aboot. No messages, nothing. Do I something wrong?
    Now I've booted 2.6.4 without debugging.

    >
    > > > The answer is here:
    > > > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=397
    > >
    > > That's no answer, that's a statement:-) Do know the exactly reason
    > > why it should be a bad idea? Is it mostly a bad idea on alpha?
    >
    > Hmm, I haven't discussed that with Richard, so I can't speak for him
    > :-) IMHO, the benefits of the kernel preempt support in general are
    > more than doubtful, the level of complexity that it adds to the kernel
    > code is just unacceptable.

    Ok, but I read somewhere exactly the opposite (lkml?).
    The statement was something like the following: "Preempt doesn't need
    much more infrastrucure in kernel code, because the needed locking
    mechanism is already there (SMP)."

    So I'm confused now:-) But I understand that every little more
    complexity is not for free. More task switches etc...

    Thank you for the infos.

    greets

    Marc
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  • Next message: Anton Blanchard: "[PATCH] fix NUMA compile with large cpumasks"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: RT patch acceptance
      ... judge the complexity of a design for that type of system. ... claim that you cannot judge the complexity of a kernel modification. ... Since the patch in question doesn't actually need that information to ... nanokernel's API up to date with additions to Linux's API that RT people ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: Granting some root permissions to certain users
      ... We use a kernel patch called trustees to do just what you're talking ... Unfortunately the patch hasn't really been kept up-to-date. ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: RT-V0.7.47-17 build fails
      ... On Monday 06 June 2005 03:41, Ingo Molnar wrote: ... >> I thought maybe I'd exersize this kernel, but a patch I thought ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • RE: [PATCH] 2.6 workaround for Athlon/Opteron prefetch errata
      ... to avoid so we can get this in to the 2.6 kernel ASAP. ... I am pretty certain the patch won't impact the ... > might want to kill the condition depending on the stepping, ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: kernel 2.6.8.1: memory leak? cdrecord problem?
      ... I tried to burn ... again the memory run full until the kernel started killing processes. ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ... More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ...
      (Linux-Kernel)