From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755767Ab0ICOJr (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Sep 2010 10:09:47 -0400 Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.22]:53378 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753281Ab0ICOJq (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Sep 2010 10:09:46 -0400 X-Authenticated: #14349625 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/7yYV58vb7yZFcKSMID4YahPeRIL3svqQuK/z+T+ oCRoghAKywDNoc Subject: Re: 2.6.32 cgroup regression From: Mike Galbraith To: Minoru Usui Cc: johunt@akamai.com, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20100831162542.98269492.usui@mxm.nes.nec.co.jp> References: <4C74274D.9060300@akamai.com> <1282715761.20033.23.camel@marge.simson.net> <20100831162542.98269492.usui@mxm.nes.nec.co.jp> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2010 16:09:57 +0200 Message-Id: <1283522997.8373.25.camel@marge.simson.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.1.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 16:25 +0900, Minoru Usui wrote: > Hi, Mike > > On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 07:56:01 +0200 > Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 13:10 -0700, Josh Hunt wrote: > > > This commit makes the ltp cpuctl latency test #2 hang indefinitely: > > > > > > commit b5d9d734a53e0204aab0089079cbde2a1285a38f > > > Author: Mike Galbraith > > > Date: Tue Sep 8 11:12:28 2009 +0200 > > > > > > sched: Ensure that a child can't gain time over it's parent after fork() > > > > Ouch. Yeah, that commit is buggy, and never got fixed up in stable. > > Reverting it will restore a slightly less buggy, but not very good > > situation. Getting the fork problems all fixed up took a while. > > (quick fix vs revert didn't help your testcase) > > I'm interested in this problem, because I hit the same problem in RHEL6 beta2. > (It based on 2.6.32) > > Are you writing a patch to solving this problem? No, the necessary patches were already written. I just needed to backport. Illness and squabbles with git sendemail (i lost) held me up. > If you are doing, I can test it in RHEL6 beta2 (or latest). I just sent a 50 patch series, ever so lovingly git am applied. git format-patch exported, then imported into evolution one darn patch at a time, to stable to either apply or bin as maintainers see fit. To test, all you should need to do is test mainline. If you'd like a quilt tarball against 32.21 anyway, just holler. The series has all the fork/exec/wakeup/hotplug yada yada fixes I think are mana from heaven for our long-term stable kernel. I may well get "are you outta yer ever lovin' mind?" back, but _I_ think it's needed, so... -Mike