diff for duplicates of <20170731150411.GA3730@linux.vnet.ibm.com> diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt index 9c8c7a0..96c741d 100644 --- a/a/1.txt +++ b/N1/1.txt @@ -34,15 +34,15 @@ On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 12:08:47PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > > > > > > > So I look for "rcu_preempt" timer events and find these: > > > > -> > > > rcu_preempt-9 [019] .... 827.579114: timer_init: timer=ffff8017d5fc7da0 -> > > > rcu_preempt-9 [019] d..1 827.579115: timer_start: timer=ffff8017d5fc7da0 function=process_timeout +> > > > rcu_preempt-9 [019] .... 827.579114: timer_init: timerÿff8017d5fc7da0 +> > > > rcu_preempt-9 [019] d..1 827.579115: timer_start: timerÿff8017d5fc7da0 function=process_timeout > > > > > > > > Next look for "ffff8017d5fc7da0" and I don't find anything else. > > > It does show up off the bottom of what would fit in pastebin... > > > -> > > rcu_preempt-9 [001] d..1 837.681077: timer_cancel: timer=ffff8017d5fc7da0 -> > > rcu_preempt-9 [001] .... 837.681086: timer_init: timer=ffff8017d5fc7da0 -> > > rcu_preempt-9 [001] d..1 837.681087: timer_start: timer=ffff8017d5fc7da0 function=process_timeout expires=4295101298 [timeout=1] cpu=1 idx=0 flags= +> > > rcu_preempt-9 [001] d..1 837.681077: timer_cancel: timerÿff8017d5fc7da0 +> > > rcu_preempt-9 [001] .... 837.681086: timer_init: timerÿff8017d5fc7da0 +> > > rcu_preempt-9 [001] d..1 837.681087: timer_start: timerÿff8017d5fc7da0 function=process_timeout expiresB95101298 [timeout=1] cpu=1 idx=0 flags= > > > > Odd. I would expect an expiration... And ten seconds is way longer > > than the requested one jiffy! @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 12:08:47PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > > There is an errata work around for the timers on this particular board. > > > I'm only vaguely aware of it, so may be unconnected. > > > -> > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c?h=v4.13-rc2&id=bb42ca47401010fc02901b5e8f79e40a26f208cb +> > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c?h=v4.13-rc2&id»42ca47401010fc02901b5e8f79e40a26f208cb > > > > > > Seems unlikely though! + we've not yet seen it on the other chips that > > > errata effects (not that that means much). diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest index 4bf8c63..ce2fdb2 100644 --- a/a/content_digest +++ b/N1/content_digest @@ -10,19 +10,8 @@ "ref\020170731120847.00003d5c@huawei.com\0" "From\0Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>\0" "Subject\0Re: RCU lockup issues when CONFIG_SOFTLOCKUP_DETECTOR=n - any one else seeing this?\0" - "Date\0Mon, 31 Jul 2017 08:04:11 -0700\0" - "To\0Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>\0" - "Cc\0dzickus@redhat.com" - sfr@canb.auug.org.au - linuxarm@huawei.com - Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com> - abdhalee@linux.vnet.ibm.com - sparclinux@vger.kernel.org - akpm@linux-foundation.org - linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org - David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> - linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org - " tglx@linutronix.de\0" + "Date\0Mon, 31 Jul 2017 15:04:11 +0000\0" + "To\0linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org\0" "\00:1\0" "b\0" "On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 12:08:47PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:\n" @@ -61,15 +50,15 @@ "> > > > \n" "> > > > So I look for \"rcu_preempt\" timer events and find these:\n" "> > > > \n" - "> > > > rcu_preempt-9 [019] .... 827.579114: timer_init: timer=ffff8017d5fc7da0\n" - "> > > > rcu_preempt-9 [019] d..1 827.579115: timer_start: timer=ffff8017d5fc7da0 function=process_timeout \n" + "> > > > rcu_preempt-9 [019] .... 827.579114: timer_init: timer\303\277ff8017d5fc7da0\n" + "> > > > rcu_preempt-9 [019] d..1 827.579115: timer_start: timer\303\277ff8017d5fc7da0 function=process_timeout \n" "> > > > \n" "> > > > Next look for \"ffff8017d5fc7da0\" and I don't find anything else. \n" "> > > It does show up off the bottom of what would fit in pastebin...\n" "> > > \n" - "> > > rcu_preempt-9 [001] d..1 837.681077: timer_cancel: timer=ffff8017d5fc7da0\n" - "> > > rcu_preempt-9 [001] .... 837.681086: timer_init: timer=ffff8017d5fc7da0\n" - "> > > rcu_preempt-9 [001] d..1 837.681087: timer_start: timer=ffff8017d5fc7da0 function=process_timeout expires=4295101298 [timeout=1] cpu=1 idx=0 flags= \n" + "> > > rcu_preempt-9 [001] d..1 837.681077: timer_cancel: timer\303\277ff8017d5fc7da0\n" + "> > > rcu_preempt-9 [001] .... 837.681086: timer_init: timer\303\277ff8017d5fc7da0\n" + "> > > rcu_preempt-9 [001] d..1 837.681087: timer_start: timer\303\277ff8017d5fc7da0 function=process_timeout expiresB95101298 [timeout=1] cpu=1 idx=0 flags= \n" "> > \n" "> > Odd. I would expect an expiration... And ten seconds is way longer\n" "> > than the requested one jiffy!\n" @@ -89,7 +78,7 @@ "> > > There is an errata work around for the timers on this particular board.\n" "> > > I'm only vaguely aware of it, so may be unconnected.\n" "> > > \n" - "> > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c?h=v4.13-rc2&id=bb42ca47401010fc02901b5e8f79e40a26f208cb\n" + "> > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c?h=v4.13-rc2&id\302\27342ca47401010fc02901b5e8f79e40a26f208cb\n" "> > > \n" "> > > Seems unlikely though! + we've not yet seen it on the other chips that\n" "> > > errata effects (not that that means much). \n" @@ -120,4 +109,4 @@ "> > \n" > -40f9d8e79b551f4a5cc30da62ac8f75c79c6d1edbab0d1b011c4f73bee84fe21 +43080b76882f736640d91f766441e88d281b804ed286ce39e379c81a1acc19fa
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N2/content_digest index 4bf8c63..afb9c5f 100644 --- a/a/content_digest +++ b/N2/content_digest @@ -8,21 +8,10 @@ "ref\020170728182053.000072aa@huawei.com\0" "ref\020170728190349.GM3730@linux.vnet.ibm.com\0" "ref\020170731120847.00003d5c@huawei.com\0" - "From\0Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>\0" - "Subject\0Re: RCU lockup issues when CONFIG_SOFTLOCKUP_DETECTOR=n - any one else seeing this?\0" + "From\0paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com (Paul E. McKenney)\0" + "Subject\0RCU lockup issues when CONFIG_SOFTLOCKUP_DETECTOR=n - any one else seeing this?\0" "Date\0Mon, 31 Jul 2017 08:04:11 -0700\0" - "To\0Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>\0" - "Cc\0dzickus@redhat.com" - sfr@canb.auug.org.au - linuxarm@huawei.com - Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com> - abdhalee@linux.vnet.ibm.com - sparclinux@vger.kernel.org - akpm@linux-foundation.org - linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org - David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> - linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org - " tglx@linutronix.de\0" + "To\0linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org\0" "\00:1\0" "b\0" "On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 12:08:47PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:\n" @@ -120,4 +109,4 @@ "> > \n" > -40f9d8e79b551f4a5cc30da62ac8f75c79c6d1edbab0d1b011c4f73bee84fe21 +4ec1c535920de1529d369bff6ad420a0003aadbe487ec5d0c5445f4555418959
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.