On man, 2003-01-13 at 16:49, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Mon, Jan 13 2003, Terje Eggestad wrote: > > Considering that doing kernel development is hard enough, new > > development is almost always done on uni processors kernels that do only > > one thing at the time. Then when you base logic is OK, you move to a > > SMP, which means (adding and) debugging you spin locks. > > Goto's aside, I find the above extremely bad advise. You should _always_ > develop with smp and for smp from the very start, or you will most > likely not get it right later on. With preempt, this becomes even more > important. You should, and I do, *design* with smp in mind, and I throw in smplock/unlonk as I go, but I tend to make first runs on a UP. I see your point on preemt, though. You do first runs on SMP? > > Considering that fucking up spin locks are prone to corrupting your > > machine, one very simple trick to makeing fewer mistakes to to have one, > > and only one, unlock for every lock. > > Taking a spin lock twice will hard lock the machine, however on smp you > will typically have the luxury of an nmi watchdog which will help you > solve this quickly. Double unlock will oops immediately if you run with > spin lock debugging (you probably should, if you are developing kernel > code). I have the console on a serial port, and a terminal server. With kdb, you can enter the kernel i kdb even when deadlocked. TJ -- _________________________________________________________________________ Terje Eggestad mailto:terje.eggestad _at_ scali.no Scali Scalable Linux Systems http://www.scali.com Olaf Helsets Vei 6 tel: +47 22 62 89 61 (OFFICE) P.O.Box 150, Oppsal +47 975 31 574 (MOBILE) N-0619 Oslo fax: +47 22 62 89 51 NORWAY _________________________________________________________________________ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo _at_ vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Follow-Ups:
- Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?Jens Axboe
- Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?Linus Torvalds
- Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?Rob Wilkens
- Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?Rob Wilkens
- Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?Tomas Szepe
- Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?Rob Wilkens
- Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?Terje Eggestad
- Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?Jens Axboe
- Prev by Date: Dell precision M50 and _very_ slow process startup
- Next by Date: Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?
- Previous by thread: Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?
- Next by thread: Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?
- Indexes:[Main][Thread]