From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1946108Ab3BHNPg (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2013 08:15:36 -0500 Received: from hydra.sisk.pl ([212.160.235.94]:34366 "EHLO hydra.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753644Ab3BHNPe (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2013 08:15:34 -0500 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: sedat.dilek@gmail.com Cc: Hillf Danton , Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linux ACPI , Linux PM List , x86@kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Chuansheng Liu Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 8 [ smp|cpufreq: WARNING: at kernel/smp.c:245 smp_call_function_single ] Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 14:21:53 +0100 Message-ID: <2612804.Hcyse1lRVO@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: KMail/4.9.5 (Linux/3.8.0-rc6; KDE/4.9.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday, February 08, 2013 01:47:44 PM Sedat Dilek wrote: > On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Hillf Danton wrote: > > Hello Sedat > > > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 5:31 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >> With today's Linux-Next I see this warning: > >> > >> [ 0.377442] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > >> [ 0.377452] WARNING: at kernel/smp.c:245 > >> smp_call_function_single+0x146/0x190() > >> [ 0.377455] Hardware name: 530U3BI/530U4BI/530U4BH > >> [ 0.377458] Modules linked in: > >> [ 0.377463] Pid: 1, comm: swapper/0 Not tainted > >> 3.8.0-rc6-next20130208-1-iniza-small #1 > >> [ 0.377467] Call Trace: > >> [ 0.377473] [] warn_slowpath_common+0x7f/0xc0 > >> [ 0.377479] [] ? acpi_cpufreq_target+0x2c0/0x2c0 > >> [ 0.377483] [] warn_slowpath_null+0x1a/0x20 > >> [ 0.377487] [] smp_call_function_single+0x146/0x190 > >> [ 0.377492] [] ? acpi_cpufreq_target+0x2c0/0x2c0 > >> [ 0.377496] [] smp_call_function_any+0x51/0x100 > >> [ 0.377500] [] get_cur_val+0x99/0x130 > >> [ 0.377504] [] ? acpi_cpufreq_cpu_init+0x2b4/0x6a0 > >> [ 0.377508] [] get_cur_freq_on_cpu+0x60/0x80 > >> [ 0.377512] [] acpi_cpufreq_cpu_init+0x412/0x6a0 > >> [ 0.377517] [] cpufreq_add_dev+0x2d9/0x4f0 > >> [ 0.377523] [] ? cpufreq_gov_dbs_init+0x2c/0x2c > >> [ 0.377528] [] subsys_interface_register+0x89/0xd0 > >> [ 0.377533] [] cpufreq_register_driver+0x8e/0x180 > >> [ 0.377537] [] acpi_cpufreq_init+0xf6/0x1f8 > >> [ 0.377542] [] ? platform_driver_register+0x46/0x50 > >> [ 0.377547] [] do_one_initcall+0x3f/0x170 > >> [ 0.377553] [] kernel_init_freeable+0x13e/0x1cd > >> [ 0.377560] [] ? do_early_param+0x86/0x86 > >> [ 0.377565] [] ? rest_init+0x80/0x80 > >> [ 0.377569] [] kernel_init+0xe/0xf0 > >> [ 0.377575] [] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0 > >> [ 0.377578] [] ? rest_init+0x80/0x80 > >> [ 0.377581] ---[ end trace c6ec8280ce20313a ]--- > >> > >> kernel/smp.c: Line #245 see [1]. > >> > > Can you please try the following? > > > > --- a/kernel/smp.c Fri Feb 8 19:25:32 2013 > > +++ b/kernel/smp.c Fri Feb 8 19:53:14 2013 > > @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ int smp_call_function_single(int cpu, sm > > * send smp call function interrupt to this cpu and as such deadlocks > > * can't happen. > > */ > > - WARN_ON_ONCE(cpu_online(this_cpu) && (irqs_disabled() || in_interrupt()) > > + WARN_ON_ONCE(cpu_online(this_cpu) && irqs_disabled() > > && !oops_in_progress); > > > > if (cpu == this_cpu) { > > -- > > NO, it doesn't. > > So, you want to partly revert... > > commit b29f39c7c3e75a741a7da88244ec707f293ec04c > "smp: Give WARN()ing if in_interrupt() when calling > smp_call_function_many()/single()" > > ...why not completely? > > This patch was in last days Linux-Next and did not cause troubles (AFAICS). This problem was introduced by some cpufreq changes that have been dropped from linux-next for now (they are still present in the one you're testing, though). Thanks, Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.