linux-kernel - Re: [-next] !irqd_can_balance() WARNINGs at irq_move_masked

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: <20150619162352.GA1412@swordfish>
Date:	Sat, 20 Jun 2015 01:23:52 +0900
From:	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [-next] !irqd_can_balance() WARNINGs at irq_move_masked_irq()

On (06/19/15 18:15), Thomas Gleixner wrote:
[..]
> > > Hi Thomas,
> > > 	Maybe it's caused by the hpet driver itself?
> > > irq_set_affinity() may set the IRQD_SETAFFINITY_PENDING flag,
> > > thus triggering the warning.
> > And the usage pattern seems reasonable, the IRQF_NOBALANCING flag
> > means nobody may change the affinity except myself:)
> 
> Right, that's why I removed the restriction. 
>
> I just wonder why we have not seen that before ...

just a note,
I compile/run every linux-next on at least two different
x86-64 boxen, w/o changing the .config a lot.

	-ss
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/