On 07/29/2014 11:22 AM, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Tue, 29 Jul 2014, Tejun Heo wrote: > >> I'm not sure that's a viable way forward. It's not like we can >> readily trigger the problematic cases which can lead to long pauses >> during cpu down. Besides, we need the distinction at the API level, >> which is the whole point of this. The best way probably is converting >> all the correctness ones (these are the minorities) over to >> queue_work_on() so that the per-cpu requirement is explicit. > > Ok so we would need this fix to avoid the message: > > > Subject: vmstat: use schedule_delayed_work_on to avoid false positives > > It seems that schedule_delayed_work_on will check for preemption even > though none can occur. schedule_delayed_work_on will not do that. So > use that function to suppress false positives. > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]> > > Index: linux/mm/vmstat.c > =================================================================== > --- linux.orig/mm/vmstat.c 2014-07-29 10:14:42.356988271 -0500 > +++ linux/mm/vmstat.c 2014-07-29 10:18:28.205920997 -0500 > @@ -1255,7 +1255,8 @@ static void vmstat_update(struct work_st > * to occur in the future. Keep on running the > * update worker thread. > */ > - schedule_delayed_work(this_cpu_ptr(&vmstat_work), > + schedule_delayed_work_on(smp_processor_id(), > + this_cpu_ptr(&vmstat_work), > round_jiffies_relative(sysctl_stat_interval)); > else { > /* >
I've tested, and this patch doesn't fix neither of the bugs reported. Thanks, Sasha -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
