Hi, Valdis Klētnieks Thank you for taking the time to respond to me. I have a better understanding of this matter.
Can I draw the conclusion that continually acquiring the spinlock causes the soft lockup and the CPU has been stuck for 22s? Can I think in this way?
No. It's been stuck for 22s *TRYING* and *FAILING* to get the spinlock.
I see. So there is a thread that has held the corresponding spinlock for more 22s, and a CPU is sticking(busy acquiring the spinlock) at the same duration. Can I think in this way? Thank you for your attention to this matter. Best Regards. Valdis Klētnieks <valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu> 于2020年7月4日周六 下午4:09写道： 孙世龙 sunshilong <sunshilong369@gmail.com> 于2020年7月4日周六 下午5:04写道：
Hi, Valdis Klētnieks
Thank you for taking the time to respond to me. I have a better understanding of this matter.
Can I draw the conclusion that continually acquiring the spinlock causes the soft lockup and the CPU has been stuck for 22s? Can I think in this way?
No. It's been stuck for 22s *TRYING* and *FAILING* to get the spinlock.
I see. So there is a thread that has held the corresponding spinlock for more 22s. Can I think in this way?
Thank you for your attention to this matter. Best Regards.
Valdis Klētnieks <valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu> 于2020年7月4日周六 下午4:09写道：
Can I draw the conclusion that continually acquiring the spinlock causes the soft lockup and the CPU has been stuck for 22s? Can I think in this way?
No. It's been stuck for 22s *TRYING* and *FAILING* to get the spinlock.
For comparison - spinlocks are usually used when you need a lock, but the code protected by the lock is short (things like adding to a linked list, etc), so it should again become available in milliseconds - things where it would take longer to put this thread to sleep and wake another one up than we expect to be waiting for this lock.