[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1400181576.5058.19.camel@joe-AO725>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 12:19:36 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...nel.org,
tj@...nel.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
fweisbec@...il.com, hch@...radead.org, mgorman@...e.de,
riel@...hat.com, bp@...e.de, rostedt@...dmis.org,
mgalbraith@...e.de, ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, oleg@...hat.com, rjw@...ysocki.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] smp: Print more useful debug info upon receiving
IPI on an offline CPU
On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 00:43 +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> Today the smp-call-function code just prints a warning if we get an IPI on
> an offline CPU. This info is sufficient to let us know that something went
> wrong, but often it is very hard to debug exactly who sent the IPI and why,
> from this info alone.
[]
> diff --git a/kernel/smp.c b/kernel/smp.c
[]
> @@ -185,14 +185,26 @@ void generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt(void)
[]
> - entry = llist_del_all(&__get_cpu_var(call_single_queue));
> - entry = llist_reverse_order(entry);
> + /*
> + * We don't have to use the _safe() variant here
> + * because we are not invoking the IPI handlers yet.
> + */
> + llist_for_each_entry(csd, entry, llist)
> + pr_warn("IPI callback %pS sent to offline CPU\n",
> + csd->func);
Perhaps add ratelimited?
--
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