[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070224.223744.59470086.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 22:37:44 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: mingo@...e.hu
Cc: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BUG in 2.6.20-rt8
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 07:27:47 +0100
>
> * Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > I got the following running stock 2.6.20-rt8 on an 4-CPU 1.8GHz
> > Opteron box. The machine continued to run a few rounds of kernbench
> > and LTP. Looks a bit scary -- a tasklet was "stolen" from
> > __tasklet_action().
> >
> > Thoughts? In the meantime, kicking it off again to see if it repeats.
>
> > BUG: at kernel/softirq.c:559 __tasklet_action()
>
> this seems to happen very sporadically. Seems to happen more likely on
> hyperthreading CPUs. It is very likely caused by the
> redesign-tasklet-locking-to-be-sane patch below - which is a quick hack
> of mine from early -rt days. Can you see any obvious bug in it? The
> cmpxchg logic is certainly a bit ... tricky, locking-wise.
Ingo, please don't use cmpxchg() in generic code, we support several
processors that simply cannot do it.
Instead of saying "it's just something special in -rt for now", take
it out now so that what you do eventually push upstream does get
tested.
Thanks.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists