On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 05:46:13PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:36:54AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 08:28:23PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > > On 09/25/2012 02:06 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > > Sasha, sorry to burden you with
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 04:56:55PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2012/9/25 Paul E. McKenney :
> > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 01:59:26PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >> Given that we have:
> >>
> >> rcu_irq_enter()
> >> rcu_user_exit()
> >> rcu_user_enter()
> >> rcu_irq_exit()
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:36:54AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 08:28:23PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > On 09/25/2012 02:06 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > Sasha, sorry to burden you with more testing request.
> > > Could you please try out this new branch? It incl
2012/9/25 Sasha Levin :
> On 09/25/2012 02:06 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> Sasha, sorry to burden you with more testing request.
>> Could you please try out this new branch? It includes some fixes after Wu
>> Fenguang and
>> Dan Carpenter reports (not related to your warnings though) and a pa
2012/9/25 Paul E. McKenney :
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 01:59:26PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> Given that we have:
>>
>> rcu_irq_enter()
>> rcu_user_exit()
>> rcu_user_enter()
>> rcu_irq_exit()
>
> Indeed, the code to deal with irq misnestings won't like that at all.
> And we ar
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 08:28:23PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 09/25/2012 02:06 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Sasha, sorry to burden you with more testing request.
> > Could you please try out this new branch? It includes some fixes after Wu
> > Fenguang and
> > Dan Carpenter reports (not
On 09/25/2012 02:06 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Sasha, sorry to burden you with more testing request.
> Could you please try out this new branch? It includes some fixes after Wu
> Fenguang and
> Dan Carpenter reports (not related to your warnings though) and a patch on
> the top
> of the pil
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 01:59:26PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 09:04:20PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 01:41:18AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [ 168.703017] [ cut here ]
> > > > [ 168.708117
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 01:10:27AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 09/25/2012 01:06 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > 2012/9/25 Sasha Levin :
> >> On 09/25/2012 12:47 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >>> - While I no longer see the warnings I've originally noticed, if I run
> >>> with Paul's last debug p
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 09:04:20PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 01:41:18AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > >
> > > [ 168.703017] [ cut here ]
> > > [ 168.708117] WARNING: at kernel/rcutree.c:502
> > > rcu_eqs_exit_common+0x4a/0x3a0()
> >
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 01:41:18AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2012/9/25 Frederic Weisbecker :
> > 2012/9/25 Sasha Levin :
> >> On 09/25/2012 01:06 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >>> 2012/9/25 Sasha Levin :
> On 09/25/2012 12:47 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > - While I no longer see
2012/9/25 Frederic Weisbecker :
> 2012/9/25 Sasha Levin :
>> On 09/25/2012 01:06 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>>> 2012/9/25 Sasha Levin :
On 09/25/2012 12:47 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> - While I no longer see the warnings I've originally noticed, if I run
> with Paul's last debug pat
2012/9/25 Sasha Levin :
> On 09/25/2012 01:06 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> 2012/9/25 Sasha Levin :
>>> On 09/25/2012 12:47 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
- While I no longer see the warnings I've originally noticed, if I run
with Paul's last debug patch I see the following warning:
>>>
>>>
2012/9/25 Sasha Levin :
> On 09/25/2012 12:47 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> - While I no longer see the warnings I've originally noticed, if I run with
>> Paul's last debug patch I see the following warning:
>
> Correction: Original warnings are still there, they just got buried in the
> huge spew t
On 09/25/2012 12:47 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> - While I no longer see the warnings I've originally noticed, if I run with
> Paul's last debug patch I see the following warning:
Correction: Original warnings are still there, they just got buried in the huge
spew that was caused by additional debu
Hi Frederic,
On 09/24/2012 11:29 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Sasha,
>
> Can you please test the following branch:
>
> git://github.com/fweisbec/linux-dynticks.git rcu/idle-for-v3.7-take3
>
> with CONFIG_RCU_USER_QS and CONFIG_RCU_USER_QS_FORCE enabled.
>
> I hope this fixes the warning.
2012/9/23 Sasha Levin :
> On 09/23/2012 02:21 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 02:27:35PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 07:50:29PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
On 09/22/2012 05:56 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> And now the prime suspect is the
On 09/23/2012 02:21 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 02:27:35PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 07:50:29PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>> On 09/22/2012 05:56 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
And now the prime suspect is the new CONFIG_RCU_USER_QS=y. Do
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 02:27:35PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 07:50:29PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > On 09/22/2012 05:56 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > And now the prime suspect is the new CONFIG_RCU_USER_QS=y. Do these
> > > warnings ever show up with CONFIG_RCU
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 07:50:29PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 09/22/2012 05:56 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > And now the prime suspect is the new CONFIG_RCU_USER_QS=y. Do these
> > warnings ever show up with CONFIG_RCU_USER_QS=n?
>
> It seems that disabling that does make the warnings go aw
On 09/22/2012 05:56 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> And now the prime suspect is the new CONFIG_RCU_USER_QS=y. Do these
> warnings ever show up with CONFIG_RCU_USER_QS=n?
It seems that disabling that does make the warnings go away.
I'll keep the tests running in case it just reduces the chances or
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 08:09:13AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 10:26:09AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > On 09/21/2012 05:18 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > > On 09/21/2012 05:12 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > >> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 03:26:27PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
>
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 10:26:09AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 09/21/2012 05:18 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > On 09/21/2012 05:12 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 03:26:27PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >>> On 09/21/2012 02:13 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > This might be
On 09/21/2012 05:18 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 09/21/2012 05:12 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 03:26:27PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>> On 09/21/2012 02:13 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> This might be unrelated, but I got the following dump as well when trinity
>> de
On 09/21/2012 05:12 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 03:26:27PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On 09/21/2012 02:13 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
This might be unrelated, but I got the following dump as well when trinity
> decided it's time to reboot my guest:
>>> OK, sound
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 03:26:27PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 09/21/2012 02:13 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> This might be unrelated, but I got the following dump as well when trinity
> >> > decided it's time to reboot my guest:
> > OK, sounds like we should hold off until you reproduce, the
On 09/21/2012 02:13 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> This might be unrelated, but I got the following dump as well when trinity
>> > decided it's time to reboot my guest:
> OK, sounds like we should hold off until you reproduce, then.
I'm not sure what you mean.
There are basically two issues I'm s
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 11:30:33AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 09/20/2012 05:23 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 09:44:57AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >> On 09/20/2012 09:33 AM, Michael Wang wrote:
> >>> On 09/20/2012 01:06 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 1
On 09/20/2012 05:23 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 09:44:57AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On 09/20/2012 09:33 AM, Michael Wang wrote:
>>> On 09/20/2012 01:06 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 06:35:36PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 09/19/2012 05:
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 09:44:57AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 09/20/2012 09:33 AM, Michael Wang wrote:
> > On 09/20/2012 01:06 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 06:35:36PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >>> On 09/19/2012 05:39 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 1
On 09/20/2012 03:44 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 09/20/2012 09:33 AM, Michael Wang wrote:
>> On 09/20/2012 01:06 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 06:35:36PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
On 09/19/2012 05:39 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:56:48PM
On 09/20/2012 09:33 AM, Michael Wang wrote:
> On 09/20/2012 01:06 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 06:35:36PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>> On 09/19/2012 05:39 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:56:48PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> Hi Paul,
>>
On 09/20/2012 01:06 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 06:35:36PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On 09/19/2012 05:39 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:56:48PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> While fuzzing using trinity inside a KVM tool
On 09/19/2012 07:06 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 06:35:36PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On 09/19/2012 05:39 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:56:48PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> While fuzzing using trinity inside a KVM tool
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 06:35:36PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 09/19/2012 05:39 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:56:48PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >> > Hi Paul,
> >> >
> >> > While fuzzing using trinity inside a KVM tools guest, I've managed to
> >> > trigger
> >> >
On 09/19/2012 05:39 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:56:48PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> > Hi Paul,
>> >
>> > While fuzzing using trinity inside a KVM tools guest, I've managed to
>> > trigger
>> > "RCU used illegally from idle CPU!" warnings several times.
>> >
>> > The
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:56:48PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> While fuzzing using trinity inside a KVM tools guest, I've managed to trigger
> "RCU used illegally from idle CPU!" warnings several times.
>
> There are a bunch of traces which seem to pop exactly at the same time and
>
Hi Paul,
While fuzzing using trinity inside a KVM tools guest, I've managed to trigger
"RCU used illegally from idle CPU!" warnings several times.
There are a bunch of traces which seem to pop exactly at the same time and from
different places around the kernel. Here are several of them:
(1):
[
38 matches
Mail list logo