Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 18:07:26 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Marius_N=C3=BCnnerich?= <marius@nuenneri.ch> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: Alexander Motin <mav@freebsd.org>, freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Hyperactive g_event thread Message-ID: <AANLkTi=uRPV2T0=t_1s=Jc4PmBtai=__HqhCtYpiDdTQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <27237.1280241532@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <4C4ED619.7050305@FreeBSD.org> <27237.1280241532@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 16:38, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote: > In message <4C4ED619.7050305@FreeBSD.org>, Alexander Motin writes: >>Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > >>I have already removed alike timeouts on up/down threads and it indeed >>was safe there. But are you really sure about this specific case? Cause >>I'm not. Up/down threads using msleep and checking lack of work after >>dropping/grabbing lock. Event thread instead does several tasks, drops >>lock few times between them and uses tsleep(). I would say there should >>be a bunch of race conditions. > > Quite likely, I didn't say it would be a trivial thing to remove > that workaround :-) Hi, I was running with a patch that removed the timeout for a while like 2 years ago. Albeit not with high load. Worked fine at that time, I will search for the patch when I'm back home later today. - Marius
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTi=uRPV2T0=t_1s=Jc4PmBtai=__HqhCtYpiDdTQ>