On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 01:43:21PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 1 Mar 2013 11:30:27 +0100 > Jan Kara <j...@suse.cz> wrote: > > > > If a CPU remains in your loop where you invoke rcu_cpu_stall_reset(), > > > there is no indication of the stall. Now, I do understand why having > > > RCU add a CPU stall warning into the mix would be very bad, but it > > > would be good to have some sort of indication that there is stalling. > > > Perhaps a counter visible in sysfs? Whatever it is, at least some way > > > of diagnosing the stall condition would be very good. > > I see. If others (Andrew, ping?) are OK with the rest of the patch, I can > > extend it and add a counter of printk() breaks we had to make. That looks > > like a good idea. > > hmpf, spose so. It sound lke the world's least interesting counter but > perhaps it will look more interesting when we see its sparkly > documentation.
Boredom is a good thing here, given that the goal is to reduce excitement when bad things happen. Or at least to increase awareness of root causes. Thanx, Paul -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/