On Tuesday 15 July 2008 12:24:54 Max Krasnyansky wrote: > Heiko Carstens wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 11:56:18AM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > > This is asking for trouble... a config option to disable this would be > > nice. But as I don't know which problem this patch originally addresses > > it might be that this is needed anyway. So lets see why we need it first. > > How about this. We'll make this a sysctl, as Rusty already did, and set the > default to 0 which means "never timeout". That way crazy people like me who > care about this scenario can enable this feature. Indeed, this was my thought too. s390 can initialize it to zero somewhere in their boot code. > btw Rusty, I just had this "why didn't I think of that" moments. This is > actually another way of handling my workload. I mean it certainly does not > fix the root case of the problems and we still need other things that we > talked about (non-blocking module delete, lock-free module insertion, etc) > but at least in the mean time it avoids wedging the machines for good. > btw I'd like that timeout in milliseconds. I think 5 seconds is way tooooo > long :). We can make it ms, sure. 200ms should be plenty of time: worst I ever saw was 150ms, and that was some weird Power box doing crazy stuff. I wouldn't be surprised if you'd never see 1ms on your hardware. The ipi idea would handle your case a little more nicely, too, but that's probably not going to hit this merge window. Cheers, Rusty. _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
