On Wed, 6 Mar 2013, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 04:58:54PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Wed, 6 Mar 2013, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > > > So, I guess the question is, whether we want to try and make the system > > > fail in a more meaningful way -- kind of like the rt throttling message > > > does - as it lets users know they've hit the wall? Something watching > > > > That Joe Doe should have noticed the throttler message, which came > > before the stall, shouldn't he? > > > > > for kstat_incr_softirqs traffic perhaps? Or other options? > > > > The rcu stall detector could use the softirq counter and if it did not > > change in the stall period print: "Caused by softirq starvation" or > > something like that. > > The idea is to (at grace-period start) take a snapshot of the CPU's > value of kstat.softirqs[RCU_SOFTIRQ], then check it at stall time, right? Yep. > Or do I have the wrong softirq counter? kstat_softirqs_cpu(RCU_SOFTIRQ, cpu) is the function you want to use. Thanks, tglx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
