Re: [PATCH REPOST] Revert mm/vmstat.c: fix vmstat_update() preemption BUG

2018-06-27 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 02:27:10PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 23:46:45 +0200 (CEST) Thomas Gleixner > wrote: > > > Can we please revert that master piece of duct tape engineering and wait > > for someone to actually trigger the warning again? > > OK. And while we're at i

Re: [PATCH REPOST] Revert mm/vmstat.c: fix vmstat_update() preemption BUG

2018-06-14 Thread Andrew Morton
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 23:46:45 +0200 (CEST) Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Can we please revert that master piece of duct tape engineering and wait > for someone to actually trigger the warning again? OK.

Re: [PATCH REPOST] Revert mm/vmstat.c: fix vmstat_update() preemption BUG

2018-06-13 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Thu, 10 May 2018, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > On 05/10/2018 12:35 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > >> The only thing this buys us is that people will hassle us if we forget > >> to fix the bug, and how pathetic is that? I mean, we may as well put > >> > >>printk("don't forget to fix the

Re: [PATCH REPOST] Revert mm/vmstat.c: fix vmstat_update() preemption BUG

2018-05-09 Thread Vlastimil Babka
On 05/10/2018 12:35 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2018-05-08 16:02:57 [-0700], Andrew Morton wrote: >> On Mon, 7 May 2018 09:31:05 +0200 Vlastimil Babka wrote: >> >>> In any case I agree that the revert should be done immediately even >>> before fixing the underlying bug. The preempt_d

Re: [PATCH REPOST] Revert mm/vmstat.c: fix vmstat_update() preemption BUG

2018-05-09 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
On 2018-05-08 16:02:57 [-0700], Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 7 May 2018 09:31:05 +0200 Vlastimil Babka wrote: > > > In any case I agree that the revert should be done immediately even > > before fixing the underlying bug. The preempt_disable/enable doesn't > > prevent the bug, it only prevents

Re: [PATCH REPOST] Revert mm/vmstat.c: fix vmstat_update() preemption BUG

2018-05-08 Thread Andrew Morton
On Mon, 7 May 2018 09:31:05 +0200 Vlastimil Babka wrote: > In any case I agree that the revert should be done immediately even > before fixing the underlying bug. The preempt_disable/enable doesn't > prevent the bug, it only prevents the debugging code from actually > reporting it! Note that it's

Re: [PATCH REPOST] Revert mm/vmstat.c: fix vmstat_update() preemption BUG

2018-05-07 Thread Vlastimil Babka
On 05/04/2018 12:44 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > This patch reverts commit c7f26ccfb2c3 ("mm/vmstat.c: fix > vmstat_update() preemption BUG"). > Steven saw a "using smp_processor_id() in preemptible" message and > added a preempt_disable() section around it to keep it quiet. This is > not

[PATCH REPOST] Revert mm/vmstat.c: fix vmstat_update() preemption BUG

2018-05-04 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
This patch reverts commit c7f26ccfb2c3 ("mm/vmstat.c: fix vmstat_update() preemption BUG"). Steven saw a "using smp_processor_id() in preemptible" message and added a preempt_disable() section around it to keep it quiet. This is not the right thing to do it does not fix the real problem. vmstat_up