From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@gmail.com>
Cc: Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@googlemail.com>,
tglx@linutronix.de, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.6.20-git15 BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#0! - timers?
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 07:08:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070223060802.GA8562@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <45DD756D.3040006@googlemail.com>
Michal,
* Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here is more
>
> hardirqs last enabled at (30787): [<c0104249>] syscall_exit_work+0x11/0x26
> hardirqs last disabled at (30788): [<c0103fc9>] ret_from_exception+0x9/0xc
> softirqs last enabled at (30202): [<c01265df>] __do_softirq+0xe4/0xea
> softirqs last disabled at (30193): [<c0106a75>] do_softirq+0x64/0xd1
could you please try the patch below? This is pretty much the only
condition under which we can silently 'leak' pending softirqs, and
trigger the new warning: if something does cond_resched_softirq() in
non-runnable state. (which is a no-no, but nothing enforced this, so it
could in theory happen.) So the question is, with this patch applied, do
you get these new warnings from sched.c?
Ingo
-------------------------->
Subject: [patch] add warning to cond_resched_softirq()
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
make sure that cond_resched_softirq() is always called with a runnable
task - so that we do not leave softirq work pending indefinitely.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
---
kernel/sched.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
Index: linux/kernel/sched.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/kernel/sched.c
+++ linux/kernel/sched.c
@@ -4689,6 +4689,7 @@ int __sched cond_resched_softirq(void)
BUG_ON(!in_softirq());
if (need_resched() && system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING) {
+ WARN_ON(current->state != TASK_RUNNING);
raw_local_irq_disable();
_local_bh_enable();
raw_local_irq_enable();
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-23 6:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-02-20 18:54 Michal Piotrowski
2007-02-20 21:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-02-20 22:37 ` Michal Piotrowski
2007-02-21 15:33 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-02-21 15:38 ` Michal Piotrowski
2007-02-21 20:00 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-02-22 1:47 ` Michal Piotrowski
2007-02-22 10:50 ` Michal Piotrowski
2007-02-23 6:08 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2007-02-23 7:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-02-23 10:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-02-24 22:45 ` Michal Piotrowski
2007-02-25 9:53 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-02-26 13:01 ` Michal Piotrowski
2007-02-26 13:25 ` [patch] sched: fix SMT scheduler bug Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070223060802.GA8562@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michal.k.k.piotrowski@gmail.com \
--cc=michal.k.k.piotrowski@googlemail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome