Hi Sebastian, Thanks for your reply and help to look at it, thanks! I also check the tasklet state machine changes, and didn't find clue for this issue. So I Temporarily reverted Ingo's patch, without this patch, my test is ok.
commit 0d9f73fc1e7270a3f8709c59c913408153d9d9f8 Author: Ingo Molnar <mi...@elte.hu> Date: Tue Nov 29 20:18:22 2011 -0500 tasklet: Prevent tasklets from going into infinite spin in RT Because this patch does not exist in the latest Linus kernel, so I have not reported this issue to kernel bugzilla. Finally, I would like to thank you again. Thanks! Yijing. On 2014/3/29 0:37, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > * Yijing Wang | 2014-03-03 17:24:39 [+0800]: > >> [2012-03-26 18:55:43][ 929.252312] WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:773 >> __tasklet_action+0x51/0x1a0() >> [2012-03-27 03:41:06][ 3647.886005] WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:773 >> __tasklet_action+0x51/0x1a0() >> [2012-03-27 03:42:04][ 3705.434418] WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:799 >> __tasklet_action+0xae/0x1a0() > >> FC card hardware -------> FC driver interrupt handler >> --------->tasklet_schedule(fc driver tasklet) ------->tasklet running, call >> function process FC IO data. >> here will disable FC card interrupt >> here will enable FC card interrupt again > > This looks okay. > >> We found the tasklet state is 0x1(mean state is TASKLET_STATE_SCHED),count >> is 0, before we call tasklet_schedule(). >> So the new tasklet can not add to CPU list. >> >> And I also add some dynamic debug in __tasklet_action(); after the issue >> occur, I open the dynamic debug. >> After we force the hardware reset to interrupt OS, we never found the FC >> driver tasklet running in dmesg(I identify the tasklet by its data). >> I guess the FC tasklet is not in CPU global tasklet list. > You guess correct. > >> I hope somebody can help to look at it. If I missing something, let me know. > > The tasklet is always added to the local cpu, never cross. That list is > always accessed with interrupts off. > With TASKLET_STATE_SCHED set, the next step is to add the task let to > the CPU's tasklet list. This isn't done if TASKLET_STATE_RUN is already > set which means __tasklet_action() is already busy serving the tasklet. > In that case it clears TASKLET_STATE_SCHED and invokes the tasklet > again. > After looking at it for a while I must say I have no idea how you > managed to keep TASKLET_STATE_SCHED set. Further, each time > TASKLET_STATE_RUN is cleared it is always with a cmpxchg() down to zero > which means TASKLET_STATE_SCHED is removed earlier. > That said, triggerring the warning at 773 is the first thing that went > wrong. After it has been added to the list, the TASKLET_STATE_RUN is > cleared again. I have no idea how it managed to remain still on except > that __tasklet_common_schedule() is invoked which is protected by the > SCHED bit… > >> Thanks! >> Yijing. > > Sebastian > > . > -- Thanks! Yijing -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/