On Tue, 29 Jul 2014, Tejun Heo wrote:
> I'm not sure that's a viable way forward. It's not like we can
> readily trigger the problematic cases which can lead to long pauses
> during cpu down. Besides, we need the distinction at the API level,
> which is the whole point of this. The best way probably is converting
> all the correctness ones (these are the minorities) over to
> queue_work_on() so that the per-cpu requirement is explicit.
Ok so we would need this fix to avoid the message:
Subject: vmstat: use schedule_delayed_work_on to avoid false positives
It seems that schedule_delayed_work_on will check for preemption even
though none can occur. schedule_delayed_work_on will not do that. So
use that function to suppress false positives.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx>
Index: linux/mm/vmstat.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/mm/vmstat.c 2014-07-29 10:14:42.356988271 -0500
+++ linux/mm/vmstat.c 2014-07-29 10:18:28.205920997 -0500
@@ -1255,7 +1255,8 @@ static void vmstat_update(struct work_st
* to occur in the future. Keep on running the
* update worker thread.
*/
- schedule_delayed_work(this_cpu_ptr(&vmstat_work),
+ schedule_delayed_work_on(smp_processor_id(),
+ this_cpu_ptr(&vmstat_work),
round_jiffies_relative(sysctl_stat_interval));
else {
/*
--
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>