LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>
To: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
	xfs@oss.sgi.com, Alan Piszcz <ap@solarrain.com>
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.6.19.2 New RAID 5 Bug (oops when writing Samba -> RAID5)
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 15:48:03 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <45B60403.1060201@tls.msk.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701230657380.8978@p34.internal.lan>

Justin Piszcz wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> 
>> Disabling pre-emption on critical and/or server machines seems to be a good
>> idea in the first place.  IMHO anyway.. ;)
>
> So bottom line is make sure not to use preemption on servers or else you 
> will get weird spinlock/deadlocks on RAID devices--GOOD To know!

This is not a reason.  The reason is that preemption usually works worse
on servers, esp. high-loaded servers - the more often you interrupt a
(kernel) work, the more nedleess context switches you'll have, and the
more slow the whole thing works.

Another point is that with preemption enabled, we have more chances to
hit one or another bug somewhere.  Those bugs should be found and fixed
for sure, but important servers/data isn't a place usually for bughunting.

/mjt

  reply	other threads:[~2007-01-23 12:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-01-20 12:23 Justin Piszcz
2007-01-20 12:46 ` Justin Piszcz
2007-01-22 21:01 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-01-22 21:59   ` Neil Brown
2007-01-23  1:44     ` Dan Williams
2007-01-23  2:06       ` Neil Brown
2007-01-23 10:56     ` Justin Piszcz
2007-01-23 11:08       ` Michael Tokarev
2007-01-23 11:59         ` Justin Piszcz
2007-01-23 12:48           ` Michael Tokarev [this message]
2007-01-23 13:46             ` Justin Piszcz
2007-01-24 23:37   ` Justin Piszcz
2007-01-26  9:25     ` Andrew Morton
2007-01-26  9:37       ` Justin Piszcz
2007-01-26 12:31       ` Justin Piszcz

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=45B60403.1060201@tls.msk.ru \
    --to=mjt@tls.msk.ru \
    --cc=ap@solarrain.com \
    --cc=jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    --subject='Re: Kernel 2.6.19.2 New RAID 5 Bug (oops when writing Samba -> RAID5)' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).