On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 04:57:01PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 10:42:19AM +0200, Toralf Förster wrote: > > yeah, now the picture becomes more clear > > ... > > net.core.warnings = 0 [ ok ] > > ick: pause : -717 > > ick : min_pause : -177 > > ick : max_pause : -717 > > ick: pages_dirtied : 14 > > ick: task_ratelimit: 0 > > Great and thanks! So it's the max pause calculation went wrong. However I still suspect this is not the main reason for the soft lockup. Because schedule_timeout() will directly return on negative timeout. So yes, we have encountered some negative pauses, however we still need to fix the huge dirtied pages problem which should be more fundamental. Thanks, Fengguang -- 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>