From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: kernel test robot <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: lkp@01.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jesper Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [lkp] [net] 1fbe4b46cac: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 2245 at kernel/sched/core.c:7376 __might_sleep+0x8b/0xa8()
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 18:31:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150804163125.GA31395@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150803164958.GA17910@redhat.com>
On 08/03, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> Now that I can actually see the code, I think that we should simply remove
> __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING) and set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE).
> But let me re-check this once again tomorrow, I simply can't understand why
> pktgen_thread_worker() does this.
>
> Unless I am totally confused they could be removed right after ef87979c273a2
> "pktgen: better scheduler friendliness" which in particular changed the main
> loop to use wait_event(). Then later baac167b "pktgen: avoid expensive
> set_current_state() call in loop" changed the 1st __set_current_state() to
> set RUNNING, and moved the 2nd set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE) outside
> the main loop for absolutely no reason.
Yes, I am sending the patch. Both set_current_state()'s look obviously unneeded,
and afaics we could hit the same warning even without 1fbe4b46caca. At least
pktgen_rem_thread()->remove_proc_entry() can sleep.
Oleg.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-04 16:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <871tfqqtuy.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com>
2015-07-30 21:20 ` [lkp] [net] 1fbe4b46cac: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 2245 at kernel/sched/core.c:7376 __might_sleep+0x8b/0xa8() Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-03 16:49 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-04 16:31 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
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=20150804163125.GA31395@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@01.org \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox