on 04/06/2011 12:11 Robert N. M. Watson said the following: > > On 4 Jun 2011, at 09:22, Andriy Gapon wrote: >> commit 458ebd9aca7e91fc6e0825c727c7220ab9f61016 >> >> generic_stop_cpus: move timeout detection code from under DIAGNOSTIC >> >> ... and also increase it a bit. IMO it's better to detect and report the >> (rather serious) condition and allow a system to proceed somehow rather than >> be stuck in an endless loop. > > Agreed on detecting and reporting. It would be good to confirm that it works in > practice, however, What is your concern here? :) The code seems rather simple - the loop is no longer infinite. > and also that there are no false positives. I'm not sure > what the best test scenarios are for that. As to the false positives - I think that that can only be verified by practice (very wide testing), because that would greatly depend on hardware. Maybe we should use some time-based approach instead of the iteration count approach or maybe we should calibrate the iteration count based on hardware characteristics... -- Andriy GaponReceived on Tue Jun 07 2011 - 12:20:34 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:14 UTC