Re: [PATCH, RFC] RCU : OOM avoidance and lower latency

On Friday 06 January 2006 20:26, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 13:58 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Another CPU might be stuck in a long 
> > running interrupt
> 
> Shouldn't a long running interrupt be considered a bug?

In normal operation yes, but there can be always exceptional
circumstances where it's unavoidable (e.g. during error handling) 
and in the name of defensive programming the rest of the system ought 
to tolerate it.

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • Re: [PATCH, RFC] RCU : OOM avoidance and lower latency
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH, RFC] RCU : OOM avoidance and lower latency
    • From: Lee Revell <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH, RFC] RCU : OOM avoidance and lower latency
• Next by Date: Re: oops pauser.
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH, RFC] RCU : OOM avoidance and lower latency
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH, RFC] RCU : OOM avoidance and lower latency
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]