[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6a23a062-9b82-668d-7945-8da34f4dc5f0@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 12:37:09 +0000
From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
To: Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Aaron Lu <aaron.lwe@...il.com>, Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>,
Julien Desfossez <jdesfossez@...italocean.com>,
Nishanth Aravamudan <naravamudan@...italocean.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, lkp@...org
Subject: Re: [sched] 10e7071b2f: BUG:kernel_NULL_pointer_dereference,address
On 07/11/2019 12:15, Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Thursday 07 Nov 2019 at 12:09:22 (+0000), Quentin Perret wrote:
>> sched_move_task() follows what Peter called the 'change' pattern, so I'm
>> thinking this is most likely the same issue. Dropping the lock causes an
>> unmitigated race between sched_move_task() and pick_next_task_dl(), so
>> hilarity ensues (set_next_task() being called twice for instance).
>
> Bah, scratch that. 10e7071b2 is clearly before the pick_next_task()
> rework, so that's not it :(
>
And besides we don't drop the lock until reaching pick_next_task_fair(),
and the splat says it died on pick_next_task_dl() which happens earlier.
> Quentin
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists