[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJhGHyBGb_fBqp7-XCD0bkZOt5E_aPKwkViY3PUN1MVZuBE3KA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 22:08:51 +0800
From: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Qian Cai <cai@...hat.com>,
Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@....com>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip V2 00/10] workqueue: break affinity initiatively
On Sat, Dec 26, 2020 at 10:52 PM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Can you please specify a bit what you encountered in rcutorture
> > before this patchset? You know we cant have a correct estimation
> > of the fix diameter without your help.
>
> It triggers the following in sched_cpu_dying() in kernel/sched/core.c,
> exactly the same as for Lai Jiangshan:
>
> BUG_ON(rq->nr_running != 1 || rq_has_pinned_tasks(rq))
>
> Which is in fact the "this" in my earlier "rcutorture hits this". ;-)
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
Hi, Hillf
https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/12/22/141
>From the email, I think rcutorture encountered the same problem.
Hi, Paul
I'm sorry to forget to add your Tested-by.
Thanks
Lai
Powered by blists - more mailing lists