From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: Regression in next with use printk_safe buffers in printk Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 07:10:09 -0800 Message-ID: <20170216151009.GS21809@atomide.com> References: <20170213185956.GM3897@atomide.com> <20170214160140.GA401@tigerII.localdomain> <20170215180158.GO21809@atomide.com> <20170216013109.GA772@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> <20170216040335.GR21809@atomide.com> <20170216042500.GC772@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170216042500.GC772@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Sergey Senozhatsky Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky , Petr Mladek , Steven Rostedt , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Russell King List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org * Sergey Senozhatsky [170215 20:26]: > On (02/15/17 20:03), Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Sergey Senozhatsky [170215 17:32]: > > > On (02/15/17 10:01), Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > [..] > > > > Below is another issue I noticed caused by commit f975237b7682 that > > > > I noticed during booting. > > > > > > do you mean that with f975237b7682 you _always_ see that illegal RCU > > > usage warning? > > > > Yeah on every boot on devices using cpuidle_coupled. > > does this mean that with the printk-safe patches reverted > (so, basically, the same conditions module 4 printk patches) > you don't see illegal RCU usage reports? at the moment I can't > see any connection between f975237b7682 and RCU usage from idle CPU. Yes reverting those four patches I listed earlier also makes it go away. Regards, Tony