* Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [ 550.280860] BUG: at kernel/softirq.c:138 local_bh_enable()
yep. The correct patch is the one below.
Ingo
--------------------->
Subject: Prevent going idle with softirq pending
From: Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The NOHZ patch contains a check for softirqs pending when a CPU goes
idle. The BUG is unrelated to NOHZ, it just was made visible by the NOHZ
patch. The BUG showed up mainly on P4 / hyperthreading enabled machines
which lead the investigations into the wrong direction in the first
place. The real cause is in cond_resched_softirq():
cond_resched_softirq() is enabling softirqs without invoking the softirq
daemon when softirqs are pending. This leads to the warning message in
the NOHZ idle code:
t1 runs softirq disabled code on CPU#0
interrupt happens, softirq is raised, but deferred (softirqs disabled)
t1 calls cond_resched_softirq()
enables softirqs via _local_bh_enable()
calls schedule()
t2 runs
t1 is migrated to CPU#1
t2 is done and invokes idle()
NOHZ detects the pending softirq
Fix: change _local_bh_enable() to local_bh_enable() so the softirq
daemon is invoked.
Thanks to Anant Nitya for debugging this with great patience !
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux/kernel/sched.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/kernel/sched.c
+++ linux/kernel/sched.c
@@ -4212,9 +4212,7 @@ int __sched cond_resched_softirq(void)
BUG_ON(!in_softirq());
if (need_resched() && system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING) {
- raw_local_irq_disable();
- _local_bh_enable();
- raw_local_irq_enable();
+ local_bh_enable();
__cond_resched();
local_bh_disable();
return 1;
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
