On Fri, 11 Feb 2005, Nathan Lynch wrote:
> With 2.6.11-rc3-bk7 on ppc64 I am seeing lots of smp_processor_id
> warnings whenever I hotplug cpus:
>
> # echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/online
> cpu 1 (hwid 1) Ready to die...
> BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [00000001] code:
> ksoftirqd/1/5
> caller is .ksoftirqd+0xbc/0x1f8
> Call Trace:
> [c0000000fffbbce0] [ffffffffffffffff] 0xffffffffffffffff (unreliable)
> [c0000000fffbbd60] [c0000000001c9f1c] .smp_processor_id+0x154/0x168
> [c0000000fffbbe20] [c00000000005f414] .ksoftirqd+0xbc/0x1f8
> [c0000000fffbbed0] [c0000000000764cc] .kthread+0x128/0x134
> [c0000000fffbbf90] [c000000000014248] .kernel_thread+0x4c/0x6c
>
> I believe the above warning is caused by the local_softirq_pending
> call on a "foreign" cpu before ksoftirqd/1 has been stopped. Looking
> at the code, I think this doesn't indicate a real bug, but it would be
> better if ksoftirqd didn't check local_softirq_pending after it's been
> kicked off its cpu, right?
How about;
Index: linux-2.6.11-rc3-mm2/kernel/softirq.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvsroot/linux-2.6.11-rc3-mm2/kernel/softirq.c,v
retrieving revision 1.1.1.1
diff -u -p -B -r1.1.1.1 softirq.c
--- linux-2.6.11-rc3-mm2/kernel/softirq.c 11 Feb 2005 05:14:57 -0000
1.1.1.1
+++ linux-2.6.11-rc3-mm2/kernel/softirq.c 12 Feb 2005 18:24:54 -0000
@@ -355,8 +355,12 @@ static int ksoftirqd(void * __bind_cpu)
set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
while (!kthread_should_stop()) {
- if (!local_softirq_pending())
+ preempt_disable();
+ if (!local_softirq_pending()) {
+ preempt_enable_no_resched();
schedule();
+ preempt_disable();
+ }
__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
@@ -364,14 +368,14 @@ static int ksoftirqd(void * __bind_cpu)
/* Preempt disable stops cpu going offline.
If already offline, we'll be on wrong CPU:
don't process */
- preempt_disable();
if (cpu_is_offline((long)__bind_cpu))
goto wait_to_die;
do_softirq();
- preempt_enable();
+ preempt_enable_no_resched();
cond_resched();
+ preempt_disable();
}
-
+ preempt_enable();
set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
}
__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
> # echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/online
> BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [00000001] code:
> swapper/0
> caller is .dedicated_idle+0x68/0x22c
> Call Trace:
> [c0000000fffafc50] [ffffffffffffffff] 0xffffffffffffffff (unreliable)
> [c0000000fffafcd0] [c0000000001c9f1c] .smp_processor_id+0x154/0x168
> [c0000000fffafd90] [c00000000000f998] .dedicated_idle+0x68/0x22c
> [c0000000fffafe80] [c00000000000fce8] .cpu_idle+0x34/0x4c
> [c0000000fffaff00] [c00000000003a744] .start_secondary+0x10c/0x150
> [c0000000fffaff90] [c00000000000bd28] .enable_64b_mode+0x0/0x28
>
> Should ppc64 simply use _smp_processor_id() in its idle loop code
> (like i386)?
I would say so, it's definitely safe.
> If I online and offline cpus rapidly enough I can eventually get the
> following:
>
> printk: 49 messages suppressed.
> BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [00000001] code:
> events/3/1262
> caller is .cache_reap+0x21c/0x2b8
> Call Trace:
> [c0000000ed67bb90] [ffffffffffffffff] 0xffffffffffffffff (unreliable)
> [c0000000ed67bc10] [c0000000001c9f1c] .smp_processor_id+0x154/0x168
> [c0000000ed67bcd0] [c0000000000938e8] .cache_reap+0x21c/0x2b8
> [c0000000ed67bda0] [c00000000006f4bc] .worker_thread+0x230/0x310
> [c0000000ed67bed0] [c0000000000764cc] .kthread+0x128/0x134
> [c0000000ed67bf90] [c000000000014248] .kernel_thread+0x4c/0x6c
>
> And this will repeat over and over even after I stop hotplugging
> cpus... from the same events thread so I think it's somehow gotten
> "stuck"?
Hmm this should be covered by the local_bh_disable() in softirq
processing.
-
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/
