Re: Why kmem_cache_free occupy CPU for more than 10 seconds?

[Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>]

On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 18:10 +0800, Zhao Forrest wrote:
> On 4/11/07, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 02:53 -0700, Paul Jackson wrote:
> > > I'm confused - which end of ths stack is up?
> > >
> > > cpuset_exit doesn't call do_exit, rather it's the other
> > > way around.  But put_files_struct doesn't call do_exit,
> > > rather do_exit calls __exit_files calls put_files_struct.
> >
> > I'm guessing its x86_64 which generates crap traces.
> >
> Yes, it's x86_64. Is there a reliable way to generate stack traces under x86_64?
> Can enabling "[ ] Compile the kernel with frame pointers" help?

Sometimes, the best is to redo the undo of the dwarf based stack
unwinder.

But as you said, that _huge_ number of buffers might be the issue, I'm
looking through the codepaths from __blkdev_put on downwards, I suspect
we hold a single lock somewhere,...

So hold on with patching the unwinder back in (unless of course you
fancy doing so :-)



--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>