On Sun 11-06-17 16:28:11, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Jun 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > > > I would just pull the cond_resched out of __collapse_huge_page_copy
> > > > right after pte_unmap. But I am not really sure why this cond_resched is
> > > > really needed because the changelog of the patch which adds is is quite
> > > > terse on details.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure what could possibly be added to the changelog. We have
> > > encountered need_resched warnings during the iteration.
> >
> > Well, the part the changelog is not really clear about is whether the
> > HPAGE_PMD_NR loops itself is the source of the stall. This would be
> > quite surprising because doing 512 iterations taking up to 20+s sounds
> > way to much.
>
> I have no idea where you come up with 20+ seconds.
OK, I misread your report as a soft lockup.
> These are not soft lockups, these are need_resched warnings. We monitor
> how long need_resched has been set and when a thread takes an excessive
> amount of time to reschedule after it has been set. A loop of 512 pages
> with ptl contention and doing {clear,copy}_user_highpage() shows that
> need_resched can sit without scheduling for an excessive amount of time.
How much is excessive here?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
