Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-05-15 Thread Fernando Lopez-Lezcano
On 05/02/2014 04:37 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: * Fernando Lopez-Lezcano | 2014-04-26 11:29:04 [-0700]: Saw this a moment ago (3.14.1 + rt1, Fedora 19 laptop - I think I have seen something similar in 3.12.x-r): Yes, you did: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/7/163 You did not test I've

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-05-15 Thread Fernando Lopez-Lezcano
On 05/02/2014 04:37 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: * Fernando Lopez-Lezcano | 2014-04-26 11:29:04 [-0700]: Saw this a moment ago (3.14.1 + rt1, Fedora 19 laptop - I think I have seen something similar in 3.12.x-r): Yes, you did: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/7/163 You did not test I've

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-05-02 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
* Fernando Lopez-Lezcano | 2014-04-26 11:29:04 [-0700]: >Saw this a moment ago (3.14.1 + rt1, Fedora 19 laptop - I think I >have seen something similar in 3.12.x-r): Yes, you did: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/7/163 You did not test I've sent. Care to do so? >Apr 26 11:16:11 localhost kernel: [

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-05-02 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Fri, 2014-05-02 at 12:09 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > * Mike Galbraith | 2014-04-19 16:46:06 [+0200]: > > >Hi Sebastian, > Hi Mike, > > >This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug. > > > >@@ -333,7 +449,7 @@ static int __ref _cpu_down(unsigned int > >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-05-02 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
* Mike Galbraith | 2014-04-21 05:31:18 [+0200]: >Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch >should be while (atomic_read(_todo)) Thanks, fixed up. Sebastian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-05-02 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
* Mike Galbraith | 2014-04-19 16:46:06 [+0200]: >Hi Sebastian, Hi Mike, >This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug. > >@@ -333,7 +449,7 @@ static int __ref _cpu_down(unsigned int >/* CPU didn't die: tell everyone. Can't complain. */ >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-05-02 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
* Mike Galbraith | 2014-04-19 16:46:06 [+0200]: Hi Sebastian, Hi Mike, This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug. @@ -333,7 +449,7 @@ static int __ref _cpu_down(unsigned int /* CPU didn't die: tell everyone. Can't complain. */

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-05-02 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
* Mike Galbraith | 2014-04-21 05:31:18 [+0200]: Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch should be while (atomic_read(done.nr_todo)) Thanks, fixed up. Sebastian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-05-02 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Fri, 2014-05-02 at 12:09 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: * Mike Galbraith | 2014-04-19 16:46:06 [+0200]: Hi Sebastian, Hi Mike, This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug. @@ -333,7 +449,7 @@ static int __ref _cpu_down(unsigned int /*

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-05-02 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
* Fernando Lopez-Lezcano | 2014-04-26 11:29:04 [-0700]: Saw this a moment ago (3.14.1 + rt1, Fedora 19 laptop - I think I have seen something similar in 3.12.x-r): Yes, you did: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/7/163 You did not test I've sent. Care to do so? Apr 26 11:16:11 localhost kernel: [

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-05-01 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Thu, 2014-05-01 at 14:42 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 01 May 2014 19:36:18 +0200 > Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > Hah! I knew you were just hiding, you sneaky little SOB ;-) > > What's this from? A new bug that had all the patches applied? Or was > this without one of the patches?

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-05-01 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Thu, 01 May 2014 19:36:18 +0200 Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:48 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:15:57 +0200 > > Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > > > > Another little bug. This

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-05-01 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:48 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:15:57 +0200 > Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > > Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch > > > > should be while

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-05-01 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:48 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:15:57 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch should be

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-05-01 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Thu, 01 May 2014 19:36:18 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:48 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:15:57 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-05-01 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Thu, 2014-05-01 at 14:42 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Thu, 01 May 2014 19:36:18 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: Hah! I knew you were just hiding, you sneaky little SOB ;-) What's this from? A new bug that had all the patches applied? Or was this without one

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:48 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:15:57 +0200 > Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > > Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch > > > > should be while

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:15:57 +0200 Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch > > > should be while (atomic_read(_todo)) > > > > > > @@ -647,7 +671,7 @@ int

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Mike Galbraith
I fired off a 100 iteration run on 64 core box. If it's still alive in the morning, it should still be busy as hell. -Mike -- 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

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch > > should be while (atomic_read(_todo)) > > > > @@ -647,7 +671,7 @@ int stop_machine_from_inactive_cpu(int ( > > ret = multi_cpu_stop(); > > > >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:54:46 +0200 Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 10:33 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:19:19 -0400 > > Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > I'm testing it now. But could you please post them as regular patches. > > > They were attachments to

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 10:33 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:19:19 -0400 > Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > I'm testing it now. But could you please post them as regular patches. > > They were attachments to this thread, and were not something that stood > > out. > > With your

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 10:19 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:00:03 +0200 > Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 09:15 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:06:29 +0200 > > > Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The End.. I hope.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:19:19 -0400 Steven Rostedt wrote: > I'm testing it now. But could you please post them as regular patches. > They were attachments to this thread, and were not something that stood > out. With your two patches, it still crashes exactly the same way. I probably should

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:00:03 +0200 Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 09:15 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:06:29 +0200 > > Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > > > > The End.. I hope. I've had enough hotplug entertainment for a while. > > > > Not for me.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 09:15 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:06:29 +0200 > Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > The End.. I hope. I've had enough hotplug entertainment for a while. > > Not for me. 3.14-rt stress-cpu-hotplug crashes quickly. But it's a > different issues than

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:06:29 +0200 Mike Galbraith wrote: > The End.. I hope. I've had enough hotplug entertainment for a while. Not for me. 3.14-rt stress-cpu-hotplug crashes quickly. But it's a different issues than what my patch addressed. I'm still debugging it. -- Steve -- To

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 09:43 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Tue, 2014-04-29 at 20:13 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 07:21:09 +0200 > > Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > > > > > Seems that migrate_disable()

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Tue, 2014-04-29 at 20:13 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 07:21:09 +0200 > Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > > > Seems that migrate_disable() must be called before taking the lock as > > > > it is done in every

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Tue, 2014-04-29 at 20:13 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 07:21:09 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: Seems that migrate_disable() must be called before taking the lock as it is done in

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 09:43 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: On Tue, 2014-04-29 at 20:13 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 07:21:09 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: Seems that

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:06:29 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: The End.. I hope. I've had enough hotplug entertainment for a while. Not for me. 3.14-rt stress-cpu-hotplug crashes quickly. But it's a different issues than what my patch addressed. I'm still debugging it. --

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 09:15 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:06:29 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: The End.. I hope. I've had enough hotplug entertainment for a while. Not for me. 3.14-rt stress-cpu-hotplug crashes quickly. But it's a different

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:00:03 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 09:15 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:06:29 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: The End.. I hope. I've had enough hotplug entertainment for

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:19:19 -0400 Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org wrote: I'm testing it now. But could you please post them as regular patches. They were attachments to this thread, and were not something that stood out. With your two patches, it still crashes exactly the same way. I

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 10:19 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:00:03 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 09:15 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:06:29 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote:

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 10:33 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:19:19 -0400 Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org wrote: I'm testing it now. But could you please post them as regular patches. They were attachments to this thread, and were not something that stood out.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:54:46 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 10:33 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:19:19 -0400 Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org wrote: I'm testing it now. But could you please post them as regular

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch should be while (atomic_read(done.nr_todo)) @@ -647,7 +671,7 @@ int stop_machine_from_inactive_cpu(int ( ret = multi_cpu_stop(msdata);

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Mike Galbraith
I fired off a 100 iteration run on 64 core box. If it's still alive in the morning, it should still be busy as hell. -Mike -- 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

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:15:57 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch should be while (atomic_read(done.nr_todo)) @@ -647,7 +671,7 @@ int

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-30 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:48 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:15:57 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 11:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: Another little bug. This hunk of patches/stomp-machine-raw-lock.patch should be

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-29 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 07:21:09 +0200 Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > Seems that migrate_disable() must be called before taking the lock as > > > it is done in every other location. > > > > And for tasklist_lock, seems you also MUST do

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-29 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Tue, 29 Apr 2014 07:21:09 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: Seems that migrate_disable() must be called before taking the lock as it is done in every other location. And for tasklist_lock, seems you also

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-28 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > Seems that migrate_disable() must be called before taking the lock as > > it is done in every other location. > > And for tasklist_lock, seems you also MUST do that prior to trylock as > well, else you'll run afoul of the hotplug

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-28 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 10:18 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Mon, 28 Apr 2014 11:09:46 +0200 > > Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > > migrate_disable-pushd-down-in-atomic_dec_and_spin_lo.patch > > > > > > bug: migrate_disable() after

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-28 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 10:18 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Mon, 28 Apr 2014 11:09:46 +0200 > Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > migrate_disable-pushd-down-in-atomic_dec_and_spin_lo.patch > > > > bug: migrate_disable() after blocking is too late. > > > > @@ -1028,12 +1028,12 @@ int

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-28 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Mon, 28 Apr 2014 11:09:46 +0200 Mike Galbraith wrote: > migrate_disable-pushd-down-in-atomic_dec_and_spin_lo.patch > > bug: migrate_disable() after blocking is too late. > > @@ -1028,12 +1028,12 @@ int atomic_dec_and_spin_lock(atomic_t *a > /* Subtract 1 from counter unless that

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-28 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 07:09 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > Hi Nicholas, > > On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 15:58 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 10:38 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 09:40 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > > > > Hotplug can still

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-28 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 07:09 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: Hi Nicholas, On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 15:58 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 10:38 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 09:40 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: Hotplug can still deadlock in rt

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-28 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Mon, 28 Apr 2014 11:09:46 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: migrate_disable-pushd-down-in-atomic_dec_and_spin_lo.patch bug: migrate_disable() after blocking is too late. @@ -1028,12 +1028,12 @@ int atomic_dec_and_spin_lock(atomic_t *a /* Subtract 1 from

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-28 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 10:18 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Mon, 28 Apr 2014 11:09:46 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: migrate_disable-pushd-down-in-atomic_dec_and_spin_lo.patch bug: migrate_disable() after blocking is too late. @@ -1028,12 +1028,12 @@ int

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-28 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 10:18 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Mon, 28 Apr 2014 11:09:46 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: migrate_disable-pushd-down-in-atomic_dec_and_spin_lo.patch bug: migrate_disable()

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-28 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 16:37 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: Seems that migrate_disable() must be called before taking the lock as it is done in every other location. And for tasklist_lock, seems you also MUST do that prior to trylock as well, else you'll run afoul of the hotplug beast.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-27 Thread Mike Galbraith
Hi Nicholas, On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 15:58 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 10:38 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 09:40 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > > Hotplug can still deadlock in rt trees too, and will if you beat it > > > hard. > > > > Box

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-27 Thread Mike Galbraith
Hi Nicholas, On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 15:58 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 10:38 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 09:40 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: Hotplug can still deadlock in rt trees too, and will if you beat it hard. Box actually

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-26 Thread Fernando Lopez-Lezcano
On 04/11/2014 11:57 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: Dear RT folks! I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch setty). Changes since v3.12.15-rt25 - I dropped the sparc64 patches I had in the queue. They did not apply cleanly, the code in v3.14 changed in the MMU area. Here is where I

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-26 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 10:38 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 09:40 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > Hotplug can still deadlock in rt trees too, and will if you beat it > > hard. > > Box actually deadlocks like so. ... 3.12-rt looks a bit busted migrate_disable/enable()

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-26 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 09:40 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > Hotplug can still deadlock in rt trees too, and will if you beat it > hard. Box actually deadlocks like so. CPU3 boot.kdump sys_wait4

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-26 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 09:40 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: Hotplug can still deadlock in rt trees too, and will if you beat it hard. Box actually deadlocks like so. CPU3 boot.kdump sys_wait4

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-26 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 10:38 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 09:40 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: Hotplug can still deadlock in rt trees too, and will if you beat it hard. Box actually deadlocks like so. ... 3.12-rt looks a bit busted migrate_disable/enable() wise.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-26 Thread Fernando Lopez-Lezcano
On 04/11/2014 11:57 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: Dear RT folks! I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch setty). Changes since v3.12.15-rt25 - I dropped the sparc64 patches I had in the queue. They did not apply cleanly, the code in v3.14 changed in the MMU area. Here is where I

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-25 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Sat, 2014-04-19 at 16:46 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > Hi Sebastian, > > On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > Dear RT folks! > > > > I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set. > > This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug. >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-25 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Sat, 2014-04-19 at 16:46 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: Hi Sebastian, On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: Dear RT folks! I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set. This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug. @@ -333,7

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-24 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Thu, 2014-04-24 at 09:12 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 04/24/2014 06:06 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > Turning lockdep on, it says it's busted. > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rt-users/msg11179.html I was heading toward the same conclusion while regression testing. Guess

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-24 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
On 04/24/2014 06:06 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote: > Turning lockdep on, it says it's busted. http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rt-users/msg11179.html Sebastian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-24 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
On 04/24/2014 06:06 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote: Turning lockdep on, it says it's busted. http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rt-users/msg11179.html Sebastian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-24 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Thu, 2014-04-24 at 09:12 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: On 04/24/2014 06:06 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote: Turning lockdep on, it says it's busted. http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rt-users/msg11179.html I was heading toward the same conclusion while regression testing. Guess I

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-23 Thread Mike Galbraith
Turning lockdep on, it says it's busted. (I'll go stare at it, maybe the beast will blink first for a change) [0.00] Lock dependency validator: Copyright (c) 2006 Red Hat, Inc., Ingo Molnar [0.00] ... MAX_LOCKDEP_SUBCLASSES: 8 [0.00] ... MAX_LOCK_DEPTH: 48 [

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-23 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 12:37:05 +0200 Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > > This -RT series didn't crashed within ~4h testing on my ARM and > > x86-32. > > x86-64 crashed after I started hackbench. I figured out that the crash > > does

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-23 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > This -RT series didn't crashed within ~4h testing on my ARM and > x86-32. > x86-64 crashed after I started hackbench. I figured out that the crash > does not happen with lazy-preempt disabled. Therefore the last but one > patch

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-23 Thread Mike Galbraith
Turning lockdep on, it says it's busted. (I'll go stare at it, maybe the beast will blink first for a change) [0.00] Lock dependency validator: Copyright (c) 2006 Red Hat, Inc., Ingo Molnar [0.00] ... MAX_LOCKDEP_SUBCLASSES: 8 [0.00] ... MAX_LOCK_DEPTH: 48 [

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-23 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: This -RT series didn't crashed within ~4h testing on my ARM and x86-32. x86-64 crashed after I started hackbench. I figured out that the crash does not happen with lazy-preempt disabled. Therefore the last but one patch in

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-23 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 12:37:05 +0200 Mike Galbraith umgwanakikb...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: This -RT series didn't crashed within ~4h testing on my ARM and x86-32. x86-64 crashed after I started hackbench. I figured out that the

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-20 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Sat, 2014-04-19 at 16:46 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > Hi Sebastian, > > On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > Dear RT folks! > > > > I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set. > > This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug. >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-20 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Sat, 2014-04-19 at 16:46 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: Hi Sebastian, On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: Dear RT folks! I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set. This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug. @@ -333,7

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-19 Thread Mike Galbraith
Hi Sebastian, On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > Dear RT folks! > > I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set. This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug. @@ -333,7 +449,7 @@ static int __ref _cpu_down(unsigned int

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-19 Thread Mike Galbraith
Hi Sebastian, On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:57 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: Dear RT folks! I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set. This hunk in hotplug-light-get-online-cpus.patch looks like a bug. @@ -333,7 +449,7 @@ static int __ref _cpu_down(unsigned int

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-11 Thread Pavel Vasilyev
11.04.2014 22:57, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior пишет: Dear RT folks! I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set. Hray! -- Pavel. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the

[ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-11 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
Dear RT folks! I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set. Changes since v3.12.15-rt25 - I dropped the sparc64 patches I had in the queue. They did not apply cleanly, the code in v3.14 changed in the MMU area. Here is where I remembered that it was not working perfectly either. - Scott

[ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-11 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
Dear RT folks! I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set. Changes since v3.12.15-rt25 - I dropped the sparc64 patches I had in the queue. They did not apply cleanly, the code in v3.14 changed in the MMU area. Here is where I remembered that it was not working perfectly either. - Scott

Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.14-rt1

2014-04-11 Thread Pavel Vasilyev
11.04.2014 22:57, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior пишет: Dear RT folks! I'm pleased to announce the v3.14-rt1 patch set. Hray! -- Pavel. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body