On Sat, 2014-02-01 at 05:21 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Fri, 2014-01-31 at 23:07 +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > * Mike Galbraith | 2014-01-17 06:17:12 [+0100]: > > > > >On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 23:22 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > >> On Thu, 16 Jan 2014 04:08:57 +0100 > > >> Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> > > >> > On Wed, 2014-01-15 at 20:58 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > 3.2.53-rt76-rc1 stable review patch. > > >> > > If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > >> > > > >> > Not sure this is needed without the tglx don't unconditionally raise > > >> > timer softirq patch, and with that patch applied in the form it exists > > >> > in 3.12-rt9, as well as this one, you'll still eventually deadlock. > > >> > > >> Hmm, I'll have to take a look. This sounds to be missing from all the > > >> stable -rt kernels. I'll be pulling in the latest updates from 3.12-rt > > >> soon. > > > > > >Below are the two deadlocks I encountered with 3.12-rt9, which has both > > >$subject and timers-do-not-raise-softirq-unconditionally.patch applied. > > > > This patch was introduced because we had a deadlock in > > run_local_timers() which took a sleeping lock in hardirq context. This > > seem not to be the case in v3.2 therefore I would suggest not to take > > this patch here because it does not fix anything. > > > > Mike, do you see these deadlocks with 3.12.*-rt11 as well? > > No. I beat 64 core box hard configured both nohz_idle and nohz_full, > the only thing that fell out was the nohz_full irqs enabled warning. Oh, and the softirq pending warnings appearing under heavy load. I hadn't gotten to chasing those, but I see they should be history. I'll wedge the pending -rt11 fixes in, and let 64 core stress a bit while you're kneading -rt12 dough. -Mike -- 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
