On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 10:08 AM Jonathan Lemon
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 08:53:22AM -0800, Yonghong Song wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 12/11/20 9:11 AM, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
> > > From: Jonathan Lemon
> > >
> > > On some systems, some variant of the following splat is
> > > repeatedly seen. T
On 12/18/20 10:06 AM, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 08:53:22AM -0800, Yonghong Song wrote:
On 12/11/20 9:11 AM, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
From: Jonathan Lemon
On some systems, some variant of the following splat is
repeatedly seen. The common factor in all traces seems
to be
On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 08:53:22AM -0800, Yonghong Song wrote:
>
>
> On 12/11/20 9:11 AM, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
> > From: Jonathan Lemon
> >
> > On some systems, some variant of the following splat is
> > repeatedly seen. The common factor in all traces seems
> > to be the entry point to task_
On 12/11/20 9:11 AM, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
From: Jonathan Lemon
On some systems, some variant of the following splat is
repeatedly seen. The common factor in all traces seems
to be the entry point to task_file_seq_next(). With the
patch, all warnings go away.
rcu: INFO: rcu_sched sel
On 12/11/20 3:01 PM, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 12:23:34PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
@@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ task_file_seq_get_next(struct bpf_iter_seq_task_file_info
*info)
curr_files = get_files_struct(curr_task);
if (!curr_files) {
On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 3:01 PM Jonathan Lemon wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 12:23:34PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > > @@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ task_file_seq_get_next(struct
> > > bpf_iter_seq_task_file_info *info)
> > > curr_files = get_files_struct(curr_task);
> > >
On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 12:23:34PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > @@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ task_file_seq_get_next(struct
> > bpf_iter_seq_task_file_info *info)
> > curr_files = get_files_struct(curr_task);
> > if (!curr_files) {
> > put_task_st
On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 10:56 AM Jonathan Lemon
wrote:
>
> From: Jonathan Lemon
>
> On some systems, some variant of the following splat is
> repeatedly seen. The common factor in all traces seems
> to be the entry point to task_file_seq_next(). With the
> patch, all warnings go away.
>
> r
From: Jonathan Lemon
On some systems, some variant of the following splat is
repeatedly seen. The common factor in all traces seems
to be the entry point to task_file_seq_next(). With the
patch, all warnings go away.
rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
rcu: \x0926-: (20
