[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20110119164159.2ff499c8.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 16:41:59 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Milton Miller <miltonm@....com>
Cc: Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com, mingo@...e.hu, jaxboe@...ionio.com,
npiggin@...il.com, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
benh@...nel.crashing.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] smp_call_function_many SMP race
On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 15:07:25 -0600
Milton Miller <miltonm@....com> wrote:
> I noticed a failure where we hit the following WARN_ON in
> generic_smp_call_function_interrupt:
>
> if (!cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(cpu, data->cpumask))
> continue;
>
> data->csd.func(data->csd.info);
>
> refs = atomic_dec_return(&data->refs);
> WARN_ON(refs < 0); <-------------------------
>
> We atomically tested and cleared our bit in the cpumask, and yet the
> number of cpus left (ie refs) was 0. How can this be?
>
> It turns out commit 54fdade1c3332391948ec43530c02c4794a38172
> (generic-ipi: make struct call_function_data lockless)
> is at fault. It removes locking from smp_call_function_many and in
> doing so creates a rather complicated race.
I've been waving https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23042 at
the x86 guys for a while now, to no avail. Do you think you just fixed
it?
--
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