From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263012AbUCLXBq (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:01:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263013AbUCLXBq (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:01:46 -0500 Received: from jurassic.park.msu.ru ([195.208.223.243]:49412 "EHLO jurassic.park.msu.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263012AbUCLXBo (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:01:44 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 02:01:41 +0300 From: Ivan Kokshaysky To: Marc Giger Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.4 on Alpha uninterruptible sleep of processes Message-ID: <20040313020141.B4021@den.park.msu.ru> References: <20040312154613.7567adab@hdg.gigerstyle.ch> <20040312182754.A680@jurassic.park.msu.ru> <20040312184115.B680@jurassic.park.msu.ru> <20040312165907.626d4a08@hdg.gigerstyle.ch> <20040312224649.A750@den.park.msu.ru> <20040312215215.1041889a@hdg.gigerstyle.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20040312215215.1041889a@hdg.gigerstyle.ch>; from gigerstyle@gmx.ch on Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 09:52:15PM +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 09:52:15PM +0100, Marc Giger wrote: > Right now I'm recompiling the kernel. So you say this patch isn't a fix > but a test? Yes. That patch just reverts new alpha semaphore stuff which went into 2.6.4. > This time I have additionally "semaphore debugging" enabled, > perhaps it's useful for you. Thanks, this might be helpful. > > The answer is here: > > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=397 > > That's no answer, that's a statement:-) Do know the exactly reason why > it should be a bad idea? Is it mostly a bad idea on alpha? Hmm, I haven't discussed that with Richard, so I can't speak for him :-) IMHO, the benefits of the kernel preempt support in general are more than doubtful, the level of complexity that it adds to the kernel code is just unacceptable. Ivan.