From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: PowerPC guest getting "BUG: scheduling while atomic" on linux-next-20210623 during secondary CPUs bringup
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2021 10:02:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87k0mi8gga.mognet@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YNWFiZii+MINhUC3@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 25/06/21 09:28, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 11:16:08AM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
>> Bharata,
>>
>> I think the regression is due to Commit f1a0a376ca0c ("sched/core:
>> Initialize the idle task with preemption disabled")
>
> So that extra preempt_disable() that got removed would've incremented it
> to 1 and then things would've been fine.
>
> Except.. Valentin changed things such that preempt_count() should've
> been inittialized to 1, instead of 0, but for some raisin that didn't
> stick.. what gives.
>
> So we have init_idle(p) -> init_idle_preempt_count(p) ->
> task_thread_info(p)->preempt_count = PREEMPT_DISABLED;
>
> But somehow, by the time you're running start_secondary(), that's gotten
> to be 0 again. Does DEBUG_PREEMPT give more clues?
Given the preempt_count isn't reset between hotplugs anymore, you might be
able to find the culprit with a hotplug cycle and ftrace with
trace_prempt_off and trace_preempt_on events (requires PREEMPT_TRACER
IIRC).
It's doable at boot time too, but that will mean sifting through many more
events than you'd like...
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: PowerPC guest getting "BUG: scheduling while atomic" on linux-next-20210623 during secondary CPUs bringup
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2021 10:02:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87k0mi8gga.mognet@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YNWFiZii+MINhUC3@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 25/06/21 09:28, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 11:16:08AM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
>> Bharata,
>>
>> I think the regression is due to Commit f1a0a376ca0c ("sched/core:
>> Initialize the idle task with preemption disabled")
>
> So that extra preempt_disable() that got removed would've incremented it
> to 1 and then things would've been fine.
>
> Except.. Valentin changed things such that preempt_count() should've
> been inittialized to 1, instead of 0, but for some raisin that didn't
> stick.. what gives.
>
> So we have init_idle(p) -> init_idle_preempt_count(p) ->
> task_thread_info(p)->preempt_count = PREEMPT_DISABLED;
>
> But somehow, by the time you're running start_secondary(), that's gotten
> to be 0 again. Does DEBUG_PREEMPT give more clues?
Given the preempt_count isn't reset between hotplugs anymore, you might be
able to find the culprit with a hotplug cycle and ftrace with
trace_prempt_off and trace_preempt_on events (requires PREEMPT_TRACER
IIRC).
It's doable at boot time too, but that will mean sifting through many more
events than you'd like...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-25 9:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-24 15:55 PowerPC guest getting "BUG: scheduling while atomic" on linux-next-20210623 during secondary CPUs bringup Bharata B Rao
2021-06-24 15:55 ` Bharata B Rao
2021-06-25 5:46 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2021-06-25 5:46 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2021-06-25 5:50 ` Bharata B Rao
2021-06-25 5:50 ` Bharata B Rao
2021-06-25 7:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-06-25 7:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-06-25 8:53 ` Bharata B Rao
2021-06-25 8:53 ` Bharata B Rao
2021-06-25 10:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-06-25 10:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-06-25 12:32 ` Bharata B Rao
2021-06-25 12:32 ` Bharata B Rao
2021-06-25 9:02 ` Valentin Schneider [this message]
2021-06-25 9:02 ` Valentin Schneider
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=87k0mi8gga.mognet@arm.com \
--to=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=bharata@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.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 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.