Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 08:06:25 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: "Wang, Xiaoming" <xiaoming.wang@intel.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, chuansheng.liu@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/spinlock_debug: avoid one thread can not obtain the
 spinlock for a long time.
Message-ID: <20140430060625.GV11096@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1398877471.21870.6.camel@wxm-ubuntu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1398877471.21870.6.camel@wxm-ubuntu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 01:04:31PM -0400, Wang, Xiaoming wrote:
> loops_per_jiffy is larger than expectation that possible
> causes one thread can not obtain the spin lock for a long time.
> So use cpu_clock() to reach timeout in one second which can
> avoid HARD LOCKUP.

This is just not making sense.. one thing is broken so then you tape on
another? Fix the first already.

Also, why do you care?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/