Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1586204
| From | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration |
| Date | 2017-02-22 15:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tdGfg-32X-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <tdEGu-1Nw-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <tdEZP-2cZ-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <tdEZP-2cZ-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <tdGfg-32X-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:31:26PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote: > > > On 02/22/2017 09:19 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Wed, 2017-02-22 at 14:12 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 01:56:37PM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> Do we really need a spinlock for that in the idle loop? > >> > >> Urgh, that's broken on RT, you cannot schedule the idle loop. > > > > That's what made me notice the obnoxious little bugger. > > Hi Mike, > > Sorry for this bug. Guess the rt_spin_lock call some function in > rtmutex.c:995. Could you like to show me how to reproduce this bug? Its not hard; spinlock_t ends up being a mutex, and this is ran from the idle thread. What thread do you think we ought to run when we block idle?
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> - 2017-02-22 14:00 +0100
Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-02-22 14:20 +0100
Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> - 2017-02-22 14:20 +0100
Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-02-22 15:40 +0100
Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration Alex Shi <alex.shi@linaro.org> - 2017-02-22 16:00 +0100
Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> - 2017-02-23 13:30 +0100
Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> - 2017-02-23 14:20 +0100
Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration Alex Shi <alex.shi@linaro.org> - 2017-02-23 15:10 +0100
Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration Alex Shi <alex.shi@linaro.org> - 2017-02-23 15:10 +0100
Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> - 2017-02-23 23:40 +0100
Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration Alex Shi <alex.shi@linaro.org> - 2017-02-24 03:00 +0100
[PATCH] cpuidle: menu: Avoid taking spinlock for accessing QoS values "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> - 2017-02-24 13:40 +0100
Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration Alex Shi <alex.shi@linaro.org> - 2017-02-22 15:40 +0100
Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> - 2017-02-22 15:50 +0100
Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration Alex Shi <alex.shi@linaro.org> - 2017-02-22 16:00 +0100
Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> - 2017-02-22 16:10 +0100
Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration Alex Shi <alex.shi@linaro.org> - 2017-02-22 16:40 +0100
Re: 9908859acaa9 cpuidle/menu: add per CPU PM QoS resume latency consideration Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> - 2017-02-22 16:50 +0100
csiph-web