Re: system lockup with 2.6.29 on Cavium/Octeon

[Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>]

On Fri, 22 May 2009 11:19:00 +1000, Greg Ungerer <gerg@snapgear.com> wrote:
> > The wrong combination comes from lazy vunmapping which was introduced
> > in 2.6.28 cycle.  Maybe we can add new API (non-lazy version of
> > vfree()) to vmalloc.c to implement module_free(), but I suppose
> > fallbacking to local_flush_tlb_all() in local_flush_tlb_kernel_range()
> > is enough().
> 
> Is there any performance impact on falling back to that?
> 
> The flushing due to lazy vunmapping didn't seem to happen
> often in the tests I was running.

I think the wrong combination can happen only when some modules were
unloaded, so performance impact would not be serious even if exists.

---
Atsushi Nemoto