From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751306AbdCQOKC (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:10:02 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([65.50.211.133]:50890 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751035AbdCQOJO (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:09:14 -0400 Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 15:09:09 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Wanpeng Li Cc: kernel test robot , LKP , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Ingo Molnar , wfg@linux.intel.com Subject: Re: [sched/core] 8a8c69c327: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 8 at kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3548 lock_release Message-ID: <20170317140909.yfwvqdouwfad26i3@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <58caef6b.avP7bzLbdfFEruLd%fengguang.wu@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 09:24:11PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote: > 2017-03-17 21:02 GMT+08:00 Wanpeng Li : > > 2017-03-17 4:02 GMT+08:00 kernel test robot : > >> Greetings, > >> > >> 0day kernel testing robot got the below dmesg and the first bad commit is > >> > >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git sched/core > >> > >> commit 8a8c69c32778865affcedc2111bb5d938b50516f > >> Author: Peter Zijlstra > >> AuthorDate: Tue Oct 4 16:04:35 2016 +0200 > >> Commit: Ingo Molnar > >> CommitDate: Thu Mar 16 09:46:22 2017 +0100 > >> > >> sched/core: Add rq->lock wrappers > >> > >> The missing update_rq_clock() check can work with partial rq->lock > >> wrappery, since a missing wrapper can cause the warning to not be > >> emitted when it should have, but cannot cause the warning to trigger > >> when it should not have. > >> > >> The duplicate update_rq_clock() check however can cause false warnings > >> to trigger. Therefore add more comprehensive rq->lock wrappery. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) > >> Cc: Linus Torvalds > >> Cc: Mike Galbraith > >> Cc: Peter Zijlstra > >> Cc: Thomas Gleixner > >> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar > > > > Please refer to: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/16/1131 > > I have another version of patch which utilizes raw_spin_lock_irqsave() > instead of rq_lock_irqsave() in __balance_callback() as before, which > one do you like, Peterz? Hurm.. the raw_spin_lock_irqsave() one I suspect. No point in pinning and then unpinning.