Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757566AbYGPJRA (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jul 2008 05:17:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752960AbYGPJQv (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jul 2008 05:16:51 -0400 Received: from mtagate5.de.ibm.com ([195.212.29.154]:4804 "EHLO mtagate5.de.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752847AbYGPJQu (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jul 2008 05:16:50 -0400 From: Christian Borntraeger To: Rusty Russell Subject: Re: [PATCH] stopmachine: add stopmachine_timeout Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:15:55 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: Max Krasnyansky , Heiko Carstens , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Hidetoshi Seto , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Zachary Amsden References: <487B05CE.1050508@jp.fujitsu.com> <487C0A76.8060401@qualcomm.com> <200807151810.00365.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> In-Reply-To: <200807151810.00365.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200807161115.55214.borntraeger@de.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1377 Lines: 26 Am Dienstag, 15. Juli 2008 schrieb Rusty Russell: > > btw Rusty, I just had this "why didn't I think of that" moments. This is > > actually another way of handling my workload. I mean it certainly does not > > fix the root case of the problems and we still need other things that we > > talked about (non-blocking module delete, lock-free module insertion, etc) > > but at least in the mean time it avoids wedging the machines for good. > > btw I'd like that timeout in milliseconds. I think 5 seconds is way tooooo > > long :). > > We can make it ms, sure. 200ms should be plenty of time: worst I ever saw was > 150ms, and that was some weird Power box doing crazy stuff. I wouldn't be > surprised if you'd never see 1ms on your hardware. I disagree that 5 seconds is to long :-). I even think having it default to 0 is the safest option for virtualized environments. What if the host is paging like hell and the vcpu cannot run due to a missing page? In that case 200ms can be an incredible short amount of time. If the timeout triggers, stop_machine_run fails, but everything would work fine - it just takes longer. -- 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/