On Tue 29-05-12 14:38:31, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, 2012-05-29 at 14:34 +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > > The only safe solution seems to be to create a variant of percpu counters > > that can be used from an interrupt. Or do you have other idea Peter? > > > > [ 20.680186] [<ffffffff8325ac9b>] _raw_spin_lock+0x3b/0x70 > > > [ 20.680186] [<ffffffff81993527>] ? __percpu_counter_sum+0x17/0xc0 > > > [ 20.680186] [<ffffffff81993527>] __percpu_counter_sum+0x17/0xc0 > > > [ 20.680186] [<ffffffff810ebf90>] ? init_timer_deferrable_key+0x20/0x20 > > > [ 20.680186] [<ffffffff8195b5c2>] fprop_new_period+0x12/0x60 > > > [ 20.680186] [<ffffffff811d929d>] writeout_period+0x3d/0xa0 > > > [ 20.680186] [<ffffffff810ec0bf>] call_timer_fn+0x12f/0x260 > > > [ 20.680186] [<ffffffff810ebf90>] ? init_timer_deferrable_key+0x20/0x20 > > Yeah, just make sure IRQs are disabled around doing that ;-) Evil ;) But we'd need to have IRQs disabled also in each fprop_fraction_percpu() call, and generally, if we want things clean, we'd need to disable them in all entry points to proportion code (or at least around all percpu calls)... Honza -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>