On Thursday 08 February 2007 09:06, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The softlock detector has a long history of false positives and > > precious few true positives, in my experience. > > hm, not so the latest & lamest in my experience. The commit that made it > quite robust was 6687a97d4041f996f725902d2990e5de6ef5cbe5, as of March > 2006, and first showed up in 2.6.17. (OTOH, since the merge of lockdep > the main source of soft lockups in the field has been quite severely > reduced. Nevertheless it's still good to have it around, occasionally > there happen other types of soft lockups too, in open-coded loops, etc.)
This reminds me the current problem in close_files() code, where we trigger soft lockup quite regularly. Is there any chance/interest we can solve the issue Andrew had with this patch ? http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/5/2/273 Thank you Eric - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
