On Wed, 30 Sep 2015 09:10:42 +0200 Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote:
> When we warn about a preempt_count leak; reset the preempt_count to > the known good value such that the problem does not ripple forward. > > This is most important on x86 which has a per cpu preempt_count that is > not saved/restored (after this series). So if you schedule with an > invalid (!2*PREEMPT_DISABLE_OFFSET) preempt_count the next task is > messed up too. > > Enforcing this invariant limits the borkage to just the one task. > > Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweis...@gmail.com> > Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org> -- Steve > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <pet...@infradead.org> > --- -- 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/
