Re: [Bug #22532] 2.6.37-rc1: BUG: scheduling while atomic (kvm_init)

Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-12-03T21:26:49Z

On Friday, December 03, 2010, Thomas Meyer wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 03.12.2010, 00:41 +0100 schrieb Rafael J. Wysocki:
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> > of recent regressions.
> >
>
> The BUG still happens:
>
> [ 0.502550] BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/1/0x00000002
> [ 0.502574] Modules linked in:
> [ 0.502577] Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.37-rc4-00153-g59e57c6 #104
> [ 0.502579] Call Trace:
> [ 0.502581] [<ffffffff81052552>] __schedule_bug+0x5a/0x5e
> [ 0.502585] [<ffffffff816f0492>] schedule+0xd4/0x592
> [ 0.502588] [<ffffffff8105010e>] ? resched_task+0x68/0x6d
> [ 0.502591] [<ffffffff8105009c>] ? test_tsk_need_resched+0x12/0x1c
> [ 0.502595] [<ffffffff816f0b91>] schedule_timeout+0x31/0xde
> [ 0.502598] [<ffffffff81057654>] ? wake_up_process+0x10/0x12
> [ 0.502602] [<ffffffff8106c73c>] ? wake_up_worker+0x1f/0x21
> [ 0.502605] [<ffffffff8106c795>] ? insert_work+0x57/0x5f
> [ 0.502608] [<ffffffff816f1e5e>] ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x20/0x2b
> [ 0.502611] [<ffffffff816f02ac>] wait_for_common+0x98/0x10e
> [ 0.502614] [<ffffffff81057628>] ? default_wake_function+0x0/0xf
> [ 0.502618] [<ffffffff816f03bc>] wait_for_completion+0x18/0x1a
> [ 0.502621] [<ffffffff8106c160>] call_usermodehelper_exec+0x82/0xd1
> [ 0.502624] [<ffffffff812c7053>] kobject_uevent_env+0x3e6/0x422
> [ 0.502628] [<ffffffff812c709a>] kobject_uevent+0xb/0xd
> [ 0.502632] [<ffffffff81390748>] device_add+0x360/0x4f6
> [ 0.502635] [<ffffffff813908f7>] device_register+0x19/0x1e
> [ 0.502639] [<ffffffff81390988>] device_create_vargs+0x8c/0xc4
> [ 0.502642] [<ffffffff813909ec>] device_create+0x2c/0x2e
> [ 0.502646] [<ffffffff813587df>] misc_register+0xba/0x113
> [ 0.502649] [<ffffffff81001e83>] kvm_init+0x1d1/0x2dc
> [ 0.502652] [<ffffffff81d39ab1>] ? pci_iommu_init+0x0/0x41
> [ 0.502655] [<ffffffff81d37505>] ? svm_init+0x0/0x1e
> [ 0.502657] [<ffffffff81d37521>] svm_init+0x1c/0x1e
> [ 0.502660] [<ffffffff810002f8>] do_one_initcall+0x7a/0x12a
> [ 0.502663] [<ffffffff81d34cfb>] kernel_init+0x133/0x1bd
> [ 0.502667] [<ffffffff81026794>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
> [ 0.502670] [<ffffffff81d34bc8>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x1bd
> [ 0.502673] [<ffffffff81026790>] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x0/0x10
> [ 0.502754] initcall svm_init+0x0/0x1e returned with preemption imbalance

Thanks for the update.

Rafael