[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130618095821.GJ3204@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:58:21 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
fweisbec@...il.com, mingo@...nel.org
Subject: Re: Another RCU trace. (3.10-rc5)
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 05:16:48PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-06-10 at 17:01 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 01:33:55PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > > > I saw some of Steven's patches get merged on Friday, is there anything else
> > > > outstanding that didn't make it in yet that I could test ?
> > > > Or is this another new bug ?
> > >
> > > I have three fixes queued up at:
> > >
> > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git rcu/urgent
> > >
> > > Kind of hard to tell whether they are relevant given the interleaved
> > > stack traces, but can't hurt to try them out.
> >
> > Here's another. Looks different.
> >
> > [ 2739.921649] ===============================
> > [ 2739.923894] [ INFO: suspicious RCU usage. ]
> > [ 2739.926144] 3.10.0-rc5+ #6 Not tainted
> > [ 2739.928397] -------------------------------
> > [ 2739.930670] include/linux/rcupdate.h:780 rcu_read_lock() used illegally while idle!
> > [ 2739.933826]
> > other info that might help us debug this:
> >
> > [ 2739.939663]
> > RCU used illegally from idle CPU!
> > rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 0
> > [ 2739.946345] RCU used illegally from extended quiescent state!
> > [ 2739.949123] 2 locks held by trinity-child1/4385:
> > [ 2739.951537] #0: (&rq->lock){-.-.-.}, at: [<ffffffff816ea16f>] __schedule+0xef/0x9c0
> > [ 2739.955316] #1: (rcu_read_lock){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffff810a5625>] cpuacct_charge+0x5/0x1f0
> > [ 2739.959101]
> > stack backtrace:
> > [ 2739.962529] CPU: 1 PID: 4385 Comm: trinity-child1 Not tainted 3.10.0-rc5+ #6
> > [ 2739.970870] 0000000000000000 ffff8802247e3cf8 ffffffff816e39db ffff8802247e3d28
> > [ 2739.974556] ffffffff810b5987 ffff880200f02568 000000000032585b ffff880200f02520
> > [ 2739.978353] 0000000000000001 ffff8802247e3d60 ffffffff810a57a5 ffffffff810a5625
> > [ 2739.982052] Call Trace:
> > [ 2739.984098] [<ffffffff816e39db>] dump_stack+0x19/0x1b
> > [ 2739.986996] [<ffffffff810b5987>] lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0xe7/0x120
> > [ 2739.990080] [<ffffffff810a57a5>] cpuacct_charge+0x185/0x1f0
> > [ 2739.992971] [<ffffffff810a5625>] ? cpuacct_charge+0x5/0x1f0
> > [ 2739.994716] [<ffffffff8109609c>] update_curr+0xec/0x250
> > [ 2739.995873] [<ffffffff810975c8>] put_prev_task_fair+0x228/0x480
> > [ 2739.997036] [<ffffffff816ea1e6>] __schedule+0x166/0x9c0
> > [ 2739.998192] [<ffffffff816eaf60>] ? __cond_resched_softirq+0x60/0x60
> > [ 2739.999344] [<ffffffff816eae94>] preempt_schedule+0x44/0x60
>
> Yeah, this one is fixed by a patch I sent out earlier, and I believe
> Peter Zijlstra is going to push it. It wasn't part of my queue.
>
> Peter, Are you going to take the preempt_schedule_context() patch?
I have it queued, I just seem to have some problems locating Ingo to
stuff patches into -tip :/
Will continue prodding.. Ingo if you're reading! :-)
--
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