From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 13:25:50 -0800 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: High lock spin time for zone->lru_lock under extreme conditions Message-Id: <20070112132550.dc007698.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20070112160104.GA5766@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Ravikiran G Thirumalai , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Andi Kleen , "Shai Fultheim (Shai@scalex86.org)" , pravin b shelar List-ID: On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 11:46:22 -0800 (PST) Christoph Lameter wrote: > > While the softlockups and the like went away by enabling interrupts during > > spinning, as mentioned in http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/3/29 , > > Andi thought maybe this is exposing a problem with zone->lru_locks and > > hence warrants a discussion on lkml, hence this post. Are there any > > plans/patches/ideas to address the spin time under such extreme conditions? > > Could this be a hardware problem? Some issue with atomic ops in the > Sun hardware? I'd assume so. We don't hold lru_lock for 33 seconds ;) Probably similar symptoms are demonstrable using other locks, if a suitable workload is chosen. Increasing PAGEVEC_SIZE might help. But we do allocate those things on the stack. -- 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: email@kvack.org