linux-kernel - Re: NOHZ: WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/smp.c:123 native_smp_send

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20130520045023.GA12690@pd.tnic>
Date:	Mon, 20 May 2013 06:50:23 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	Michael Wang <wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	x86@...nel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: NOHZ: WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/smp.c:123
 native_smp_send_reschedule, round 2

On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 11:16:33AM +0800, Michael Wang wrote:
> I suppose the reason is that the cpu we passed to
> mod_delayed_work_on() has a chance to become offline before we
> disabled irq, what about check it before send resched ipi? like:

I think this is only addressing the symptoms - what we should be doing
instead is asking ourselves why are we even scheduling work on a cpu if
the machine goes offline?

I don't know though who should be responsible for killing all that
work - the workqueue itself or the guy who created it, i.e. cpufreq
governor...

Hmmm.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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/