From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Bradley Morgan <include@grrlz.net>
Cc: brauner@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, oleg@redhat.com,
tglx@kernel.org, npiggin@gmail.com, ebiederm@xmission.com,
pasha.tatashin@soleen.com, kees@kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
syzbot+8fdf0d8e10bdde1c2e88@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] reboot: use make_task_dead for the halt and power off fallback
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2026 18:10:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260713181001.a46e0bf04235dd076f10d5dd@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260713062332.21131-1-include@grrlz.net>
On Mon, 13 Jul 2026 06:23:32 +0000 Bradley Morgan <include@grrlz.net> wrote:
> The reboot syscall calls do_exit(0) after kernel_halt() or
> kernel_power_off(). Those are expected to stop the machine and not
> return. When they do return, the shutdown path has already disabled
> interrupts and torn down state, and do_exit() then hits its
> WARN_ON(irqs_disabled()).
Well... why are they returning? Is it both kernel_halt() and
kernel_power_off()? The report seems to indicate that
kernel_power_off() is returning.
So is there a flaw in x86 machine_power_off() which we should be
addressing?
> That is an error path, not a clean exit. Use make_task_dead() instead
> of do_exit(0): it is built for this, fixes up the irqs disabled and
> preempt state, and bounds repeated failure via oops_limit. This
> matches the make_task_dead pattern that exit.c already uses for the
> oops path.
And make_tsk_dead() is __noreturn.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-14 1:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-13 6:23 Bradley Morgan
2026-07-14 1:10 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2026-07-14 15:48 ` Bradley Morgan
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=20260713181001.a46e0bf04235dd076f10d5dd@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=include@grrlz.net \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=syzbot+8fdf0d8e10bdde1c2e88@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
/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