Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 22:08:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 22:08:25 -0500 Received: from tisch.mail.mindspring.net ([207.69.200.157]:20276 "EHLO tisch.mail.mindspring.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 22:08:24 -0500 Message-ID: <3E1E3B64.5040803@emageon.com> Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 21:17:56 -0600 From: Brian Tinsley Organization: Emageon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: William Lee Irwin III CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.4.20, .text.lock.swap cpu usage? (ibm x440) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1777 Lines: 44 >>>At some point in the past, I wrote: >>> Either pollwait tables (invisible in 2.4 and 2.5), kernel stacks of >>> threads (which don't get pae_pgd's and are hence invisible in 2.4 >>> and 2.5), or pagecache, with a much higher likelihood of pagecache. >>On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 06:44:10PM -0600, Brian Tinsley wrote: >> The "kernel stacks of threads" may have some bearing on my incarnation >> of this problem. We have several heavily threaded Java applications >> running at the time the live-locks occur. At our most problematic site, >> one application has a bug that can cause hundreds of timer threads (I >> mean like 800 or so!) to be "accidentally" created. This site is >> scheduled for an upgrade either tonight or tomorrow, so I will leave the >> system as it is and see if I can still cause the live-lock to manifest >> itself after the upgrade. >There is no extant implementation of paged stacks yet. For the most part, this is probably a boundary condition, right? Anyone that intentionally has 800+ threads in a single application probably needs to reevaluate their design :) >I'm working on a different problem (mem_map on 64GB on 2.5.x). I probably > won't have time to implement it in the near future, I probably won't be doing it >vs. 2.4.x, and I won't have to if someone else does it first. Is that a hint to someone in particular? -- -[========================]- -[ Brian Tinsley ]- -[ Chief Systems Engineer ]- -[ Emageon ]- -[========================]- - 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/