From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261208AbUKTH5q (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Nov 2004 02:57:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261238AbUKTH5p (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Nov 2004 02:57:45 -0500 Received: from smtp208.mail.sc5.yahoo.com ([216.136.130.116]:26475 "HELO smtp208.mail.sc5.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261191AbUKTH5m (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Nov 2004 02:57:42 -0500 Message-ID: <419EF8F2.1050909@yahoo.com.au> Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 18:57:38 +1100 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041007 Debian/1.7.3-5 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: William Lee Irwin III CC: Linus Torvalds , Christoph Lameter , akpm@osdl.org, Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Hugh Dickins , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: page fault scalability patch V11 [0/7]: overview References: <20041120020306.GA2714@holomorphy.com> <419EBBE0.4010303@yahoo.com.au> <20041120035510.GH2714@holomorphy.com> <419EC205.5030604@yahoo.com.au> <20041120042340.GJ2714@holomorphy.com> <419EC829.4040704@yahoo.com.au> <20041120053802.GL2714@holomorphy.com> <419EDB21.3070707@yahoo.com.au> <20041120062341.GM2714@holomorphy.com> <419EE911.20205@yahoo.com.au> <20041120071514.GO2714@holomorphy.com> <419EF257.8010103@yahoo.com.au> In-Reply-To: <419EF257.8010103@yahoo.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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... :|