[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170216151009.GS21809@atomide.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 07:10:09 -0800
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Russell King <rmk@...linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Regression in next with use printk_safe buffers in printk
* Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com> [170215 20:26]:
> On (02/15/17 20:03), Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com> [170215 17:32]:
> > > On (02/15/17 10:01), Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > [..]
> > > > Below is another issue I noticed caused by commit f975237b7682 that
> > > > I noticed during booting.
> > >
> > > do you mean that with f975237b7682 you _always_ see that illegal RCU
> > > usage warning?
> >
> > Yeah on every boot on devices using cpuidle_coupled.
>
> does this mean that with the printk-safe patches reverted
> (so, basically, the same conditions module 4 printk patches)
> you don't see illegal RCU usage reports? at the moment I can't
> see any connection between f975237b7682 and RCU usage from idle CPU.
Yes reverting those four patches I listed earlier also makes it go
away.
Regards,
Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists