[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080209140711.GA16205@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2008 06:07:11 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Cc: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: preempt rcu bug on s390
On Sat, Feb 09, 2008 at 12:34:35PM +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> Using CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU and CONFIG_NO_IDLE_HZ on s390 my system always
> gets stuck when running with more than one cpu.
> When booting with four cpus I get all four cpus caught withing cpu_idle
> and not advancing anymore. However there is the init process which is
> waitung for synchronize_rcu() to complete (lcrash output):
>
> STACK TRACE FOR TASK: 0xf84d968 (swapper)
>
> STACK:
> 0 schedule+842 [0x36c956]
> 1 schedule_timeout+172 [0x36d0e4]
> 2 wait_for_common+204 [0x36c398]
> 3 synchronize_rcu+76 [0x567bc]
> 4 netlink_change_ngroups+150 [0x2b4302]
> 5 genl_register_mc_group+256 [0x2b6174]
> 6 genl_init+188 [0x534e44]
> 7 kernel_init+444 [0x518334]
> 8 kernel_thread_starter+6 [0x192a6]
>
> If I change the code so that timer ticks won't be disabled everything
> runs fine. So my guess is that rcu_needs_cpu() doesn't do the right
> thing for the rcu preemptible case.
>
> Kernel version is git head of today.
>
> Any ideas?
Does this tree have http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/1/29/208 applied?
If not, could you please check it out?
Thanx, Paul
--
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