[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAF+s44SeEdDJGjGdonfSNhv45ydR-CZKWsWyuEa4JUue1jz8QQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2025 09:43:18 +0800
From: Pingfan Liu <piliu@...hat.com>
To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: Derive root domain from active cpu in
task's cpus_ptr
Hi Juri,
On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 10:37 PM Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> On 29/09/25 21:36, Pingfan Liu wrote:
> > When testing kexec-reboot on a 144 cpus machine with
> > isolcpus=managed_irq,domain,1-71,73-143 in kernel command line, I
> > encounter the following bug:
> >
> > [ 97.114759] psci: CPU142 killed (polled 0 ms)
> > [ 97.333236] Failed to offline CPU143 - error=-16
> > [ 97.333246] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > [ 97.342682] kernel BUG at kernel/cpu.c:1569!
> > [ 97.347049] Internal error: Oops - BUG: 00000000f2000800 [#1] SMP
> > [ 97.353281] Modules linked in: rfkill sunrpc dax_hmem cxl_acpi cxl_port cxl_core einj vfat fat arm_smmuv3_pmu nvidia_cspmu arm_spe_pmu coresight_trbe arm_cspmu_module rndis_host ipmi_ssif cdc_ether i2c_smbus spi_nor usbnet ast coresight_tmc mii ixgbe i2c_algo_bit mdio mtd coresight_funnel coresight_stm stm_core coresight_etm4x coresight cppc_cpufreq loop fuse nfnetlink xfs crct10dif_ce ghash_ce sha2_ce sha256_arm64 sha1_ce sbsa_gwdt nvme nvme_core nvme_auth i2c_tegra acpi_power_meter acpi_ipmi ipmi_devintf ipmi_msghandler dm_mirror dm_region_hash dm_log dm_mod
> > [ 97.404119] CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 2583 Comm: kexec Kdump: loaded Not tainted 6.12.0-41.el10.aarch64 #1
>
> Could you please confirm this is still reproducible with plain upstream
> (e5f0a698b34e ("Linux 6.17") as of today)? I just wonder if we might be
> missing some of the recent fixes around SCHED_DEADLINE.
>
I can reproduce this bug with (9087e52ce85e Linux 6.17-rc7). I thought
that the last fix for SCHED_DEADLINE should be (a3a70caf79067
sched/deadline: Fix dl_server behaviour), which is included by -rc7
tag.
Is it good enough or should I have a test against (e5f0a698b34e ("Linux 6.17")
Thanks,
Pingfan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists