On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 02:53:50PM +0300, Dan Aloni wrote: > On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 07:37:49PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > I don't know how to test this patch, the ack/nack from maintainer is wanted. > > > > flush_scheduled_work() is evil and should be avoided. Change tty_set_ldisc() > > and release_dev() to use cancel_delayed_work_sync/cancel_work_sync. > > > > I am not sure we really need to call do_tty_hangup() when cancel_work_sync() > > returns true, but this matches the current behaviour. > > I also noticed this problem recently with 2.6.22, on a 2-CPU box where there > was one SCHED_RR userspace process stuck in a busy loop. The box was > completely
IMHO, it was rather a busy sleep. > responsive but had this annoyance where all tty closings were stuck in > flush_scheduled_work(). It's especially noticable when you ssh to the machine > and then try to log out. > > A temporary workaround was to give just the workqueue events/* threads a > SCHED_FIFO static priority of 99, but I have kept that small patch to > myself (figured it's just too nasty). It looks like there was something more than this one SCHED_RR: probably some high priority task(s) could have preempted workqueue thread, delaying run_workqueues. Then it should be an interesting test for this new, 2.6.23 scheduler. Regards, Jarek P. PS: sorry for so delayed responsing. - 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/
