On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 22:49 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> Are you referring to this the commit 158e1645e (trim task_work: get rid of
> hlist)
No, to something like the below..
> I am also able to reproduce this on another 8 node machine too.
Ship me one ;-)
> Just to update, I had to revert commit: b9403130a5 sched/cleanups: Add
> load balance cpumask pointer to 'struct lb_env' so that your patches
> apply cleanly. (I dont think this should have caused any problem.. but)
Yeah, I've got a rebase on top of that.. just wanted fold this
page::last_nid thing into the page::flags before posting again.
---
--- a/include/linux/sched.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched.h
@@ -1539,6 +1539,7 @@ struct task_struct {
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
u64 node_stamp; /* migration stamp */
unsigned long numa_contrib;
+ struct callback_head numa_work;
#endif /* CONFIG_SMP */
#endif /* CONFIG_NUMA */
struct rcu_head rcu;
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -816,7 +816,7 @@ void task_numa_work(struct callback_head
struct task_struct *t, *p = current;
int node = p->node_last;
- WARN_ON_ONCE(p != container_of(work, struct task_struct, rcu));
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(p != container_of(work, struct task_struct, numa_work));
/*
* Who cares about NUMA placement when they're dying.
@@ -891,8 +891,8 @@ void task_tick_numa(struct rq *rq, struc
* yet and exit_task_work() is called before
* exit_notify().
*/
- init_task_work(&curr->rcu, task_numa_work);
- task_work_add(curr, &curr->rcu, true);
+ init_task_work(&curr->numa_work, task_numa_work);
+ task_work_add(curr, &curr->numa_work, true);
}
curr->node_last = node;
}
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
