From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@gmail.com>,
Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>,
Yong Zhang <yong.zhang@windriver.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: mce.c related WARNING: at kernel/timer.c:983 del_timer_sync
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 20:36:23 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1103082019180.2787@localhost6.localdomain6> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110308185035.GF2499@one.firstfloor.org>
B1;2401;0cOn Tue, 8 Mar 2011, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > >
> > > But, the actual reason is likely some MCE parameter change at boot causing
> > > mce_restart() which in turn calls on_each_cpu mce_cpu_restart() which calls
> > > del_timer_sync().
> >
> > Seems we found a real bug.
>
> I don't think it's a real bug actually because the timer cannot run at
> the same time in this state. It's an interrupt which runs with irq disabled
> Really the only case where it could lead to deadlock is when the timer
> runs with irqs on and the other interrupt with the del_timer_sync
> interrupts it. So most likely your new WARN_ON() is catching
> lots of innocent code.
Nonsense. All timer callbacks run with interrupts enabled. See
timer.c:__run_timers()
spin_unlock_irq(&base->lock);
call_timer_fn(timer, fn, data);
spin_lock_irq(&base->lock);
So it can happen and that's a plain bug, not innocent code.
> That said I don't think we need the del_timer_sync in mce.c either
> for the same reason. The timer is always on the
> same CPU, so it cannot run in parallel.
But a running timer callback can be interrupted by the smp function
call and if that happens you run into a different problem
softirq()
mce_start_timer()
--> SMP function call interrupt
__mcheck_cpu_init_timer()
del_timer()
add_timer_on()
<--
add_timer_on()
--> BUG_ON(timer_pending())
> @@ -2075,7 +2075,7 @@ mce_cpu_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb, unsigned long action, void *hcpu)
> break;
> case CPU_DOWN_PREPARE:
> case CPU_DOWN_PREPARE_FROZEN:
> - del_timer_sync(t);
> + del_timer(t);
Sigh. This is not called on the CPU which is taken down and you really
want to call del_timer_sync() here.
> smp_call_function_single(cpu, mce_disable_cpu, &action, 1);
> break;
> case CPU_DOWN_FAILED:
Thanks,
tglx
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-08 19:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-08 1:31 Venkatesh Pallipadi
2011-03-08 9:06 ` Yong Zhang
2011-03-08 18:50 ` Andi Kleen
2011-03-08 19:36 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
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=alpine.LFD.2.00.1103082019180.2787@localhost6.localdomain6 \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=venki@google.com \
--cc=yong.zhang0@gmail.com \
--cc=yong.zhang@windriver.com \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®