Hi, On 18/02/19 17:31, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > If the ksoftirqd thread has a softirq pending and is blocked on the > `local_softirq_locks' lock then softirq_check_pending_idle() won't > complain because the "lock owner" will mask away this softirq from the > mask of pending softirqs. > If ksoftirqd has an additional softirq pending then it won't be masked > out because we never look at ksoftirqd's mask. > > If there are still pending softirqs while going to idle check > ksoftirqd's and ktimersfotd's mask before complaining about unhandled > softirqs. > > Cc: stable...@vger.kernel.org > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bige...@linutronix.de>
I've been seeing those messages while running some stress tests (hog tasks pinned to CPUs). Have yet to see them after I applied this patch earlier this morning (it usually took not much time to reproduce). Tested-by: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@redhat.com> Thanks! - Juri
