[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120412015341.GA2497@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:53:41 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: shemminger@...tta.com, mroos@...ux.ee,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: suspicious RCU usage warnings in 3.3.0
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 09:03:19PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:45:07 -0700
>
> > On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 08:18:54PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> >> From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
> >> Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:10:04 -0700
> >>
> >> > On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 16:08:37 -0700
> >> > "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hmmm... What CPU family is this running on? From the look of the
> >> >> stack, it is sneaking out of idle into softirq without telling RCU.
> >> >> This would cause RCU to complain bitterly about being invoked from
> >> >> the idle loop -- and RCU ignores CPUs in the idle loop.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanx, Paul
> >> >
> >> > Sun4... Ping David.
> >>
> >> So is there anything specific I need to do in the sparc64
> >> idle loop?
> >
> > Hmmm... I must confess that I don't immediately see how control
> > is passing from cpu_idle() in arch/sparc/kernel/process_64.c to
> > __handle_softirq().
> >
> > But it looks like a simple function call in the call trace:
>
> It's coming from the trap return code path at the end of hardware
> interrupt processing, on the IRQ stack.
Ah! I should have guessed something like that was happening given
that __handle_softirq() is written in assembly.
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