From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:60842 "EHLO mout.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751221AbcJGJeK (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Oct 2016 05:34:10 -0400 Message-ID: <1475832812.1509.10.camel@gmx.de> Subject: Re: [tip:locking/core] sched/core: Fix an SMP ordering race in try_to_wake_up() vs. schedule() From: Mike Galbraith To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: stable , Ingo Molnar , Oleg Nesterov , linux-tip-commits Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2016 11:33:32 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20161007082950.GS3142@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1475804215.4075.13.camel@gmx.de> <20161007082950.GS3142@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 2016-10-07 at 10:29 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 03:36:55AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > Seems this may be one of those not so theoretical races. A humongous > > ppc64 box actually managed to run a task on two cores.. briefly. > > Cute :-) Why was you running a year old kernel on that box anyway? ;-) It was a 3.0 kernel.. and nearly virgin, a tad less than 22k patches :) -Mike