From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@gmail.com>
Cc: Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@googlemail.com>,
tglx@linutronix.de, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.6.20-git15 BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#0! - timers?
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 07:08:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070223060802.GA8562@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <45DD756D.3040006@googlemail.com>
Michal,
* Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here is more
>
> hardirqs last enabled at (30787): [<c0104249>] syscall_exit_work+0x11/0x26
> hardirqs last disabled at (30788): [<c0103fc9>] ret_from_exception+0x9/0xc
> softirqs last enabled at (30202): [<c01265df>] __do_softirq+0xe4/0xea
> softirqs last disabled at (30193): [<c0106a75>] do_softirq+0x64/0xd1
could you please try the patch below? This is pretty much the only
condition under which we can silently 'leak' pending softirqs, and
trigger the new warning: if something does cond_resched_softirq() in
non-runnable state. (which is a no-no, but nothing enforced this, so it
could in theory happen.) So the question is, with this patch applied, do
you get these new warnings from sched.c?
Ingo
-------------------------->
Subject: [patch] add warning to cond_resched_softirq()
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
make sure that cond_resched_softirq() is always called with a runnable
task - so that we do not leave softirq work pending indefinitely.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
---
kernel/sched.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
Index: linux/kernel/sched.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/kernel/sched.c
+++ linux/kernel/sched.c
@@ -4689,6 +4689,7 @@ int __sched cond_resched_softirq(void)
BUG_ON(!in_softirq());
if (need_resched() && system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING) {
+ WARN_ON(current->state != TASK_RUNNING);
raw_local_irq_disable();
_local_bh_enable();
raw_local_irq_enable();
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-23 6:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-02-20 18:54 2.6.20-git15 BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#0! - timers? Michal Piotrowski
2007-02-20 21:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-02-20 22:37 ` Michal Piotrowski
2007-02-21 15:33 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-02-21 15:38 ` Michal Piotrowski
2007-02-21 20:00 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-02-22 1:47 ` Michal Piotrowski
2007-02-22 10:50 ` Michal Piotrowski
2007-02-23 6:08 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2007-02-23 7:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-02-23 10:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-02-24 22:45 ` Michal Piotrowski
2007-02-25 9:53 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-02-26 13:01 ` Michal Piotrowski
2007-02-26 13:25 ` [patch] sched: fix SMT scheduler bug Ingo Molnar
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=20070223060802.GA8562@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michal.k.k.piotrowski@gmail.com \
--cc=michal.k.k.piotrowski@googlemail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.