On 08/22/18 21:46, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 8/22/18 1:37 PM, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
On 08/22/18 21:17, Jens Axboe wrote:
So the obvious suspect is the new return of UINT_MAX from get_limit() to
__wbt_wait(). I first suspected that I mispatched something, but it's all
like in mainline or your tree
On 8/22/18 1:37 PM, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
> On 08/22/18 21:17, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> So the obvious suspect is the new return of UINT_MAX from get_limit() to
>>> __wbt_wait(). I first suspected that I mispatched something, but it's all
>>> like in mainline or your tree. Even the recently moved-a
On 08/22/18 21:17, Jens Axboe wrote:
So the obvious suspect is the new return of UINT_MAX from get_limit() to
__wbt_wait(). I first suspected that I mispatched something, but it's all
like in mainline or your tree. Even the recently moved-around atomic loop
inside rq_wait_inc_below() is 1:1 the s
On 8/22/18 1:12 PM, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
> On 08/22/18 19:28, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 8/22/18 8:27 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 8/22/18 6:54 AM, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
On 08/22/18 06:10, Jens Axboe wrote:
> [...]
> If you have time, please look at the 3 patches I posted earlier t
On 08/22/18 19:28, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 8/22/18 8:27 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
On 8/22/18 6:54 AM, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
On 08/22/18 06:10, Jens Axboe wrote:
[...]
If you have time, please look at the 3 patches I posted earlier today.
Those are for mainline, so should be OK :-)
I'm just playi
