search for: rescheduling

...or reconstruction. md: using 128k window, over a total of 2096384 blocks. md: md0: sync done. RAID1 conf printout: --- wd:2 rd:2 disk 0, wo:0, o:1, dev:sda2 disk 1, wo:0, o:1, dev:sdb2 sd 0:0:0:0: SCSI error: return code = 0x06000000 end_request: I/O error, dev sda, sector 451792231 raid1: sda1: rescheduling sector 451792168 sd 0:0:0:0: SCSI error: return code = 0x06000000 end_request: I/O error, dev sda, sector 451792263 raid1: sda1: rescheduling sector 451792200 raid1: sdb1: redirecting sector 451792168 to another mirror raid1: sdb1: redirecting sector 451792200 to another mirror md: syncing RAID arr...

I can't make it to the current schedule for alternate Tuesday 1400 UTC meetings. I was hoping we could reschedule it to 1500 UTC on the same Tuesdays instead, or any other slot which could work for all. What do other members think? -- Lokesh Freenode: lsm5 GPG: 0xC7C3A0DD -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type:

On 2017?12?07? 13:09, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 01:15:15PM +0900, Toshiaki Makita wrote: >> Since commit 39e6c8208d7b ("net: solve a NAPI race") napi has been able >> to be rescheduled within napi_complete_done() even in non-busypoll case, >> but virtnet_poll() always enabled interrupts before complete, and when >> napi was rescheduled

On 2017?12?07? 13:09, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 01:15:15PM +0900, Toshiaki Makita wrote: >> Since commit 39e6c8208d7b ("net: solve a NAPI race") napi has been able >> to be rescheduled within napi_complete_done() even in non-busypoll case, >> but virtnet_poll() always enabled interrupts before complete, and when >> napi was rescheduled

...at the August 2008 developer meeting [1], where he very briefly mentioned allowing the register allocator to reschedule instructions as a "crazy idea" for the future. I independently arrived at the same crazy idea :-) and I'm wondering if anybody ever went and actually implemented a rescheduling allocator in LLVM. I've done some poking around the web, the mailing list archives and the LLVM source code, but I haven't found anything suggesting that this has been done. If anyone has tried it and would be willing to share code, insights, or lessons learned, I would be very grateful to...

Since commit 39e6c8208d7b ("net: solve a NAPI race") napi has been able to be rescheduled within napi_complete_done() even in non-busypoll case, but virtnet_poll() always enabled interrupts before complete, and when napi was rescheduled within napi_complete_done() it did not disable interrupts. This caused more interrupts when event idx is disabled. According to commit cbdadbbf0c79

Since commit 39e6c8208d7b ("net: solve a NAPI race") napi has been able to be rescheduled within napi_complete_done() even in non-busypoll case, but virtnet_poll() always enabled interrupts before complete, and when napi was rescheduled within napi_complete_done() it did not disable interrupts. This caused more interrupts when event idx is disabled. According to commit cbdadbbf0c79

On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 01:15:15PM +0900, Toshiaki Makita wrote: > Since commit 39e6c8208d7b ("net: solve a NAPI race") napi has been able > to be rescheduled within napi_complete_done() even in non-busypoll case, > but virtnet_poll() always enabled interrupts before complete, and when > napi was rescheduled within napi_complete_done() it did not disable > interrupts. >

From: Martin Peres <martin.peres at labri.fr> This should fix a deadlock that has been reported to us where fan_update() would hold the fan lock and try to grab the alarm_program_lock to reschedule an update. On an other CPU, the alarm_program_lock would have been taken before calling fan_update(), leading to a deadlock. Reported-by: Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz at gmail.com>

On Feb 3, 2010, at 6:00 AM, Gergö Barany wrote: > I independently arrived at the same crazy idea :-) and I'm wondering if > anybody ever went and actually implemented a rescheduling allocator in LLVM. > I've done some poking around the web, the mailing list archives and the LLVM > source code, but I haven't found anything suggesting that this has been > done. If anyone has tried it and would be willing to share code, insights, > or lessons learned, I would...

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Lokesh Mandvekar <lsm5 at fedoraproject.org> wrote: > I can't make it to the current schedule for alternate Tuesday 1400 UTC > meetings. > > I was hoping we could reschedule it to 1500 UTC on the same Tuesdays > instead, or > any other slot which could work for all. > > What do other members think? > Ok for me > -- >

We currently fill all of RX ring, then add_buf returns ENOSPC, which gets mis-detected as an out of memory condition and causes us to reschedule the work, and so on forever. Fix this by oom = err == -ENOMEM; Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> --- Rusty, please review the following patch for 2.6.35. drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 7 +++---- 1 files changed, 3

We currently fill all of RX ring, then add_buf returns ENOSPC, which gets mis-detected as an out of memory condition and causes us to reschedule the work, and so on forever. Fix this by oom = err == -ENOMEM; Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> --- Rusty, please review the following patch for 2.6.35. drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 7 +++---- 1 files changed, 3

...on success, error code on failure. > + */ > +int drm_vblank_work_schedule(struct drm_vblank_work *work, > + u64 count, bool nextonmiss) > +{ > + struct drm_vblank_crtc *vblank = work->vblank; > + unsigned long irqflags; > + u64 cur_vbl; > + int ret = 0; > + bool rescheduling = false; > + bool passed; > + > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vblank->dev->event_lock, irqflags); > + > + if (work->cancel) > + goto out; > + > + if (work->state == DRM_VBL_WORK_RUNNING) { > + work->reschedule = true; > + work->count = count; > + go...

...using the new @count. + * + * Returns: + * 0 on success, error code on failure. + */ +int drm_vblank_work_schedule(struct drm_vblank_work *work, + u64 count, bool nextonmiss) +{ + struct drm_vblank_crtc *vblank = work->vblank; + unsigned long irqflags; + u64 cur_vbl; + int ret = 0; + bool rescheduling = false; + bool passed; + + spin_lock_irqsave(&vblank->dev->event_lock, irqflags); + + if (work->cancel) + goto out; + + if (work->state == DRM_VBL_WORK_RUNNING) { + work->reschedule = true; + work->count = count; + goto out; + } else if (work->state != DRM_VBL_WORK_IDL...

Will the Bay Area LLVM Social take place on July 5 (first Thursday), or be rescheduled because adjacent to the July 4 holiday? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120625/6b8626ff/attachment.html>

..._schedule(struct drm_vblank_work *work, > > > + u64 count, bool nextonmiss) > > > +{ > > > + struct drm_vblank_crtc *vblank = work->vblank; > > > + unsigned long irqflags; > > > + u64 cur_vbl; > > > + int ret = 0; > > > + bool rescheduling = false; > > > + bool passed; > > > + > > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vblank->dev->event_lock, irqflags); > > > + > > > + if (work->cancel) > > > + goto out; > > > + > > > + if (work->state == DRM_VBL_WORK_RUNNING)...

...+ */ > > +int drm_vblank_work_schedule(struct drm_vblank_work *work, > > + u64 count, bool nextonmiss) > > +{ > > + struct drm_vblank_crtc *vblank = work->vblank; > > + unsigned long irqflags; > > + u64 cur_vbl; > > + int ret = 0; > > + bool rescheduling = false; > > + bool passed; > > + > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vblank->dev->event_lock, irqflags); > > + > > + if (work->cancel) > > + goto out; > > + > > + if (work->state == DRM_VBL_WORK_RUNNING) { > > + work->reschedule = tru...

Hi, we are in the midst of an interesting work that begun with setting 'guessInstructionProperties = 0' in the SystemZ backend. We have found this to be useful, and discovered many instructions where the hasSideEffects flag was incorrectly set while it actually shouldn't. The attached patch and test case triggers an assert in TwoAddress.  (bin/llc ./tc_TwoAddr_crash.ll

...ork, > > > > + u64 count, bool nextonmiss) > > > > +{ > > > > + struct drm_vblank_crtc *vblank = work->vblank; > > > > + unsigned long irqflags; > > > > + u64 cur_vbl; > > > > + int ret = 0; > > > > + bool rescheduling = false; > > > > + bool passed; > > > > + > > > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&vblank->dev->event_lock, irqflags); > > > > + > > > > + if (work->cancel) > > > > + goto out; > > > > + > > > > + if (...