On Thu, 2018-03-15 at 16:28 +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote: > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 02:42:00PM +0000, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > > But even with loop-limit we will need ratelimit each printk() > > *also*. > > Otherwise loop-limit will be based on time spent printing, not on > > anything else.. > > The patch makes sense even with loop-limit in my opinion. > > Looks like I mis-read your patch, somehow it looked to me as if you > replace all 'ratelimited' usages with a call to __ratelimit(), but > you > just move 'ratelimited' into the loop, which actually makes sense.
Oh, ok > But still, this alone is no proper fix for the soft-lockups you are > seeing. Well, I can also limit number of loops with say cap_num_fault_regs(). I didn't do that as on my measures the time spent on clearing a fault is so small, that I'm not sure if it's possible to stuck in this loop. -- Thanks, Dmitry _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu