On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 02:19:51PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-06-02 at 07:18 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
> > index d12470e..9a08bdc 100644
> > --- a/kernel/rcutree.c
> > +++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
> > @@ -1320,9 +1320,9 @@ static int rcu_gp_init(struct rcu_state *rsp)
> > rnp->grphi, rnp->qsmask);
> > raw_spin_unlock_irq(&rnp->lock);
> > #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_DELAY
> > - if ((prandom_u32() % (rcu_num_nodes * 8)) == 0 &&
> > + if ((prandom_u32() % (rcu_num_nodes + 1)) == 0 &&
> > system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING)
> > - schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(2);
> > + udelay(200);
> > #endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_DELAY */
> > cond_resched();
> > }
>
> I ran this for a bit. Where it usually crashes in less than a minute,
> this ran for over 10 minutes without issue.
>
> Tested-by: Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org>
Thank you!!!
And yes, if this was production code rather than test code, I probably
would have favored a solution like yours.
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/
