[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201227160220.GK2657@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 08:02:20 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
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 Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 10:08:51PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> 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.
No need to apologize, especially given that I didn't get around to
testing it until after it was pulled into -tip. ;-)
Thank you for the patch series!
Thanx, Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists