On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 2:03 AM, Paul E. McKenney
> wrote:
>
> > Any thoughts on the feasibility of implementing NMI-based stack backtraces
> > for ARM?
>
> Nico's department, so let's page him.
That _could_ be done, at least in theory, with some res
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 11:07:37AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 2:03 AM, Paul E. McKenney
> wrote:
>
> > In the meantime, a crude fallback is for the CPU that detected the stall
> > to trace the stack of the task running on the other CPU. See below for
> > a crude (and u
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 2:03 AM, Paul E. McKenney
wrote:
> In the meantime, a crude fallback is for the CPU that detected the stall
> to trace the stack of the task running on the other CPU. See below for
> a crude (and untested) patch.
OK now I get this:
INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 2:03 AM, Paul E. McKenney
wrote:
> Any thoughts on the feasibility of implementing NMI-based stack backtraces
> for ARM?
Nico's department, so let's page him.
In IIRC ux500 all NMIs are reserved for the secure world, so it's
basically a no can do. :-(
And I'm told this
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:10:30AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:53 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> wrote:
>
> > Could you please try reproducing with CONFIG_RCU_CPU_STALL_INFO=y?
>
> Yep: looks like this:
>
> INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks:
> 0: (0 tic
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:53 PM, Paul E. McKenney
wrote:
> Could you please try reproducing with CONFIG_RCU_CPU_STALL_INFO=y?
Yep: looks like this:
INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks:
0: (0 ticks this GP) idle=458/0/0
(detected by 1, t=29904 jiffies)
[] (unwind_back
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:27:32AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 09:49:14AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> >> I saw this once as well testing the fix to Daniel's deep idle hang
> >> issue (also on 32 bit).
>
> Joh
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Paul E. McKenney
wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 09:49:14AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
>> I saw this once as well testing the fix to Daniel's deep idle hang
>> issue (also on 32 bit).
John, what system was this? If it's not Snowball/ux500 we can atleast
conclude t
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 09:49:14AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 09/13/2012 05:36 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> >Hi Paul et al,
> >
> >I have this sporadic lockup in the SMP idle thread on ARM U8500:
> >
> >root@ME:/
> >root@ME:/
> >root@ME:/ INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: { 0}
> >(
On 09/13/2012 05:36 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
Hi Paul et al,
I have this sporadic lockup in the SMP idle thread on ARM U8500:
root@ME:/
root@ME:/
root@ME:/ INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: { 0}
(detected by 1, t=23190 jiffies)
[] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0xf8) from []
(rcu_check_cal
10 matches
Mail list logo
