From: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
To: trisha yad <trisha1march@gmail.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org,
kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, mhocko@suse.cz,
rientjes@google.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@openvz.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: Issue with core dump
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 08:31:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111102153146.GC12543@dhcp-172-17-108-109.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGr+u+wgAYVWgdcG6o+6F0mDzuyNzoOxvsFwq0dMsR3JNnZ-cA@mail.gmail.com>
Hello,
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 12:03:39PM +0530, trisha yad wrote:
> In loaded embedded system the time at with code hit do_user_fault()
> and core_dump_wait() is bit
> high, I check on my system it took 2.7 sec. so it is very much
> possible that core dump is not correct.
This may sound like arguing over semantics but it doesn't matter how
long it takes, it's still correct. You're arguing that it's not
immediate enough. IOW, no matter how fast you make it, you cannot
guarantee that results from slow operation wouldn't appear.
Also, the time between do_user_fault() and actual core dumping isn't
the important factor here. do_user_fault() directly triggers delivery
of SIGSEGV (or BUS) and signal delivery will immediately deliver
SIGKILL to all other threads in the process, so it should be immediate
enough, or, rather, we don't have any way to make it any more
immediate. It's basically direct call + IPI (if some threads are
running on other cpus).
Are you actually seeing artifacts from delayed core dump? Given the
code path, I'm highly skeptical that would be the actual case. If
you're using shared memory between different processes, then that
delay would matter but for such cases there's nothing much to do.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-02 15:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-11-01 12:17 trisha yad
2011-11-01 15:23 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-11-01 15:59 ` Tejun Heo
2011-11-02 6:33 ` trisha yad
2011-11-02 11:30 ` Ralf Baechle
2011-11-02 15:31 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2011-11-02 15:55 ` Oleg Nesterov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20111102153146.GC12543@dhcp-172-17-108-109.mtv.corp.google.com \
--to=htejun@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=khlebnikov@openvz.org \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=trisha1march@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox