WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Fix softlockup issue after vcpu hotplug

To: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>, "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Fix softlockup issue after vcpu hotplug
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 22:54:19 +0800
Delivery-date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 06:54:12 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <D470B4E54465E3469E2ABBC5AFAC390F9E1187@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcdESFqDCWsISfq5RGeHgxcxVzRqmQACelaDAAAZiDAAAP4q2wADxf1QAAFVV3AAAMUYXAAACCkwAACFZyAAAV9OMAABEoucAAAWMnAAANBdIA==
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Fix softlockup issue after vcpu hotplug
>From: Tian, Kevin
>Sent: 2007年1月30日 22:34
>>I wouldn't expect this to make any significant difference to scheduling
>>accounting, certainly over a multi-second time period.
>>
>>Does the time you hoy-unplug the vcpu for make a difference to how
>>often you
>>see this problem? Did you try repro'ing with a 2.6.16 kernel?
>>
>> -- Keir
>
>I can't tell, since I didn't use same pace in each round by manual
>operation. I tried both immediate plug after unplug, and a longer
>interval than 10s. But the first warning jumped out when I finished
>the test and ready to send out the 'good' news. :-(
>
>I'll repro 2.6.16 kernel tomorrow, because remote box crashed just
>now.
>
>Thanks,
>Kevin

I have to say previous change incomplete, because it only limit 
timeout to 1s for very long timeout case (BITS_PER_LONG-3), 
while exclude the case in the middle. I should keep that 1s limit 
on all branches, in case there're some not very long, but longer 
than 10s timeout is hit. However due to crashed box, I have to 
verify it tomorrow too.

Thanks,
Kevin

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>