Re: page fault scalability patch V11 [0/7]: overview

From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin_at_yahoo.com.au>
Date: 2004-11-20 18:57:38
Nick Piggin wrote:
> William Lee Irwin III wrote:

>> No, it's on-topic.
>> (1) The issue is not theoretical. e.g. sysrq t does trigger NMI oopses,
>>     merely not every time, and not on every system. It is not
>>     associated with hardware failure. It is, however, tolerable
>>     because sysrq's require privilege to trigger and are primarly
>>     used when the box is dying anyway.
> 
> 
> OK then put a touch_nmi_watchdog in there if you must.
> 

Duh, there is one in there :\

Still, that doesn't really say much about a normal tasklist traversal
because this thing will spend ages writing stuff to serial console.

Now I know going over the whole tasklist is crap. Anything O(n) for
things like this is crap. I happen to just get frustrated to see
concessions being made to support more efficient /proc access. I know
you are one of the ones who has to deal with the practical realities
of that though. Sigh. Well try to bear with me... :|
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Sat Nov 20 02:57:53 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:32 EST