mic_xxx_return barrier semantics")
>
> This patch depends on patch "powerpc: Make value-returning atomics fully
> ordered" for PPC_ATOMIC_ENTRY_BARRIER definition.
>
> Cc: # 3.4+
> Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney
> ---
> arch/powerpc/incl
ed, which can avoid possible
> memory ordering problems if userspace code relies on futex system call
> for fully ordered semantics.
>
> Cc: # 3.4+
> Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney
> ---
> These two are separated and splited from the patchset of
this bug has probably been around longer. But it's unlikely to
> cause much harm, but the new warning causes the system to lock up.
>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.2+
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra
> Cc:"Paul E. McKenney"
> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt
It does look
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:18:33AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 02:28:35PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > I am not seeing a sync there, but I really have to defer to the
> > maintainers on this one. I could easily have missed one.
>
> So x86 i
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 04:45:03PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 02:28:35PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:21:47AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 03:15:32PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > > &
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:21:47AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 03:15:32PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 01:19:17PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > >
> > > Am I missing something here? If not, it seems to me that
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 12:48:03PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 08:07:05PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 08:53:21AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> [snip]
> > >
> > > I'm afraid more than that, the above litmus a
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 03:50:44PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:35:10AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > Dammit guys, it's never simple is it?
>
> I re-read this and it's even more confusing than I first thought.
>
> > On Wed, Oct 14
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 10:49:23PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 01:19:17PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:55:56PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > > According to memory-barriers.txt, xchg, cmpxchg and their atomic{,64}_
> >
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:35:44AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> Dammit guys, it's never simple is it?
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 02:44:53PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > To that end, the herd tool can make a diagram of what it thought
> > happened, and I have
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:11:01AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 08:53:21AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 02:44:53PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> [snip]
> > > To that end, the herd tool can make a
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 09:22:26AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 08:53:21AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 02:44:53PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:04:19PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > &
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 08:53:21AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 02:44:53PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:04:19PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 01:19:17PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:04:19PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 01:19:17PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Suppose we have something like the following, where "a" and "x" are both
> > initially zero:
> >
>
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:55:56PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> According to memory-barriers.txt, xchg, cmpxchg and their atomic{,64}_
> versions all need to imply a full barrier, however they are now just
> RELEASE+ACQUIRE, which is not a full barrier.
>
> So replace PPC_RELEASE_BARRIER and PPC_ACQ
Commit-ID: 6e91f8cb138625be96070b778d9ba71ce520ea7e
Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/6e91f8cb138625be96070b778d9ba71ce520ea7e
Author: Paul E. McKenney
AuthorDate: Mon, 11 May 2015 11:13:05 -0700
Committer: Paul E. McKenney
CommitDate: Wed, 27 May 2015 12:59:32 -0700
rcu: Correctly
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
As noted earlier, the following sequence of events can occur when
running PREEMPT_RCU and HOTPLUG_CPU on a system with a multi-level
rcu_node combining tree:
1. A group of tasks block on CPUs corresponding to a given leaf
rcu_node structure while
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 10:45:33PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 09:36:15PM +0100, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * Place this after a control barrier (such as e.g. a spin_unlock_wait())
> > + * to ensure that reads cannot be moved ahead of the control_barrier.
> > + *
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:29:24PM -0500, Peter Hurley wrote:
> On 02/10/2015 11:38 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 09:03:50AM -0500, Peter Hurley wrote:
> >> On 02/06/2015 09:08 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >>> A lockless_derefere
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 09:03:50AM -0500, Peter Hurley wrote:
> On 02/06/2015 09:08 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > A lockless_dereference() appears to be missing in llist_del_first().
> > It should only matter for Alpha in practice.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers
> > CC: Huang Ying
>
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 08:03:19AM +0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 03:35:37PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 01:53:50PM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > >
&g
On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 01:53:50PM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > Cc:
> >
> > Yet I cannot allow git-send-email to actually send email to that address,
> > lest I get an automated nastygram in response.
>
> Intere
On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 06:16:25AM +0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 06, 2015 at 09:08:21PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > A lockless_dereference() appears to be missing in llist_del_first().
> > It should only matter for Alpha in practice.
>
> Meta-comment, do we really care about Alpha an
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 01:54:28PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 05:24:11AM CEST, paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
> >On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 01:45:28PM -0400, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> >> On Tue, 7 Oct 2014 06:43:29 -0700
> >> "Paul E. McKenney"
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 01:45:28PM -0400, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Oct 2014 06:43:29 -0700
> "Paul E. McKenney" wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 09:29:42AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> [ ... snip ... ]
> > >
> > > Paul, Tehun, how do you
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 09:29:42AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 06:21:58AM CEST, paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
> >On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 03:47:48PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >> On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 03:21:19PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >> > On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 01:24:21
On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 03:47:48PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 03:21:19PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 01:24:21PM -0400, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> > > Similar to the stop_machine deadlock scenario on !PREEMPT kernels
> > > addressed in b22ce2785d97 "workqueu
ed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> ---
> commit 561a4fe851ccab9dd0d14989ab566f9392d9f8b5
> Author: Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)
Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney
> Date: Fri May 2 13:30:04 2014 -0400
>
> tracing: Use rcu_dereference_sched() for trace event triggers
>
> As trace e
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 06:59:07PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 15:45:37 -0800
> "Paul E. McKenney" wrote:
>
> > > static void inode_free_security(struct inode *inode)
> > > {
> > > struct inode_security_struct *isec = inode
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 06:27:56PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 18:25:23 -0500
> Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 06:41:03 +0800
> > Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > > I think the sane short term fix is to make the kfree() of the i_security
> > > member be a rcu
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 06:41:03AM +0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I think the sane short term fix is to make the kfree() of the i_security
> member be a rcu free, and not clear the member.
Interesting use case. ;-)
Thanx, Paul
> Not pretty
On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 06:15:07PM +0100, Jochen Striepe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 03:25:23AM +0100, Jochen Striepe wrote:
> > Applies, compiles, and runs smoothly on top of 3.12.6. I'll send word
> > if anything odd shows up.
>
> Tested with various loads, everything nice an
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 03:25:23AM +0100, Jochen Striepe wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 02:40:06PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > > rcu: Kick CPU halfway to RCU CPU stall warning
> [...]
> > And you are quite right, there is a p
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 12:22:57PM +0100, Jochen Striepe wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 06:54:41AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 02:58:04PM +0100, Jochen Striepe wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 04:26:14PM -0800
On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 02:58:04PM +0100, Jochen Striepe wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 04:26:14PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Hmmm... Does the following patch help?
> [...]
> > rcu: Kick CPU halfway to RCU CPU stall warning
>
> The st
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 06:49:31PM +0200, Jochen Striepe wrote:
> Hello again,
>
> On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 01:28:34PM +0200, Jochen Striepe wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 03:27:51PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > rcu: Reject memory-order-induced stall
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 01:28:34PM +0200, Jochen Striepe wrote:
> Hello again,
>
> On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 03:27:51PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Several people helped track down another source of spurious stall
> > warnings on large systems, please se
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 09:45:50AM +0200, Jochen Striepe wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 03:27:51PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 11:58:36PM +0200, Jochen Striepe wrote:
> > > I just got this on 3.10.11 on the sam
lse-positive scenarios (synchronization has proven to be
a very bad idea on large systems), this should get rid of a large class
of these scenarios.
Reported-by: Fabian Herschel
Reported-by: Michal Hocko
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Reviewed-by: Michal Hocko
diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.
SS_ONCE() added on
->next dereference.
v3: Restored () around macro param which was accidentally removed.
Spotted by Paul.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo
Reported-by: Fengguang Wu
Cc: Dipankar Sarma
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney"
Cc: "David S. Miller"
Cc: Li Zefan
Cc: Patrick McHar
SS_ONCE() added on
->next dereference.
v3: Restored () around macro param which was accidentally removed.
Spotted by Paul.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo
Reported-by: Fengguang Wu
Cc: Dipankar Sarma
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney"
Cc: "David S. Miller"
Cc: Li Zefan
Cc: Patrick McHar
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:01:05PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 10:14 +0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > OK, I am stupid enough to take a stab at this...
> > >
> > > 1.Does the Linux kernel community's health depend on the occasional
> > > rant? [My gues
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 04:19:34PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 04:08:31PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 03:49:23PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > > On 07/17/13 15:02, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 03:49:23PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 07/17/13 15:02, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 07:40:43AM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> >
> > [ ... ]
> >>
> >> The result: 75% of their developers are women. If you give a flying
> >> fuck about diversity, and wan
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:14:49AM +0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 14:18 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 10:27:09PM +0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 15:38 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > > O
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 10:27:09PM +0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 15:38 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > >
> > > Can we please make this into a Kernel Summit discussion. I highly doubt
> > > we would solve anything,
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:54:13AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-10-14 at 16:32 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 11:14:28PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2012-10-11 at 10:00 +0900, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > >
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 11:14:28PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-10-11 at 10:00 +0900, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > 3.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> >
> > --
> >
> > From: &q
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 11:56:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 02:19:14AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 14:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 04:58:24PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker
idle in order to complete grace periods.
Add this missing pair of calls in the m68k's idle loop.
Reported-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker
Acked-by: Geert Uytterhoeven
Cc: m68k
Cc: 3.2.x..
Cc: Paul E. McKenney
---
arch/m68k/kernel/process.c |3 +++
1 files
idle in order to complete grace periods.
Add this missing pair of calls in the h8300's idle loop.
Reported-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker
Cc: Yoshinori Sato
Cc: 3.2.x..
Cc: Paul E. McKenney
---
arch/h8300/kernel/process.c |3 +++
1 files changed, 3 insert
idle in order to complete grace periods.
Add this missing pair of calls in the parisc's idle loop.
Reported-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker
Cc: James E.J. Bottomley
Cc: Helge Deller
Cc: Parisc
Cc: 3.2.x..
Cc: Paul E. McKenney
---
arch/parisc/kernel/process.c |
idle in order to complete grace periods.
Add this missing pair of calls in the xtensa's idle loop.
Reported-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker
Cc: Chris Zankel
Cc: 3.2.x..
Cc: Paul E. McKenney
---
arch/xtensa/kernel/process.c |3 +++
1 files changed, 3 insert
idle in order to complete grace periods.
Add this missing pair of calls in the Alpha's idle loop.
Reported-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker
Cc: Richard Henderson
Cc: Ivan Kokshaysky
Cc: Matt Turner
Cc: alpha
Cc: Paul E. McKenney
Cc: Michael Cree
Cc: 3.2.x..
idle in order to complete grace periods.
Add this missing pair of calls in the m32r's idle loop.
Reported-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker
Cc: Hirokazu Takata
Cc: 3.2.x..
Cc: Paul E. McKenney
---
arch/m32r/kernel/process.c |3 +++
1 files changed, 3 insert
idle in order to complete grace periods.
Add this missing pair of calls in the Cris's idle loop.
Reported-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker
Cc: Mikael Starvik
Cc: Jesper Nilsson
Cc: Cris
Cc: 3.2.x..
Cc: Paul E. McKenney
---
arch/cris/kernel/process.c |3 ++
idle in order to complete grace periods.
Add this missing pair of calls in the Frv's idle loop.
Reported-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker
Cc: David Howells
Cc: 3.2.x..
Cc: Paul E. McKenney
---
arch/frv/kernel/process.c |3 +++
1 files changed, 3 insert
idle in order to complete grace periods.
Add this missing pair of calls in the mn10300's idle loop.
Reported-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker
Cc: David Howells
Cc: Koichi Yasutake
Cc: 3.2.x..
Cc: Paul E. McKenney
---
arch/mn10300/kernel/process.c |3 +++
1 fil
idle in order to complete grace periods.
Add this missing pair of calls in the scores's idle loop.
Reported-by: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker
Cc: Chen Liqin
Cc: Lennox Wu
Cc: 3.2.x..
Cc: Paul E. McKenney
---
arch/score/kernel/process.c |4 +++-
1 files
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 09:15:27AM +1200, Michael Cree wrote:
> On 26/08/12 04:18, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 03:16:49PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 08:50:47PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Au
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 03:16:49PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 08:50:47PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 02:19:14AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 14:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 02:19:14AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 14:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 04:58:24PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Changes since v1:
> > >
>
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 04:58:24PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Changes since v1:
>
> - Fixed preempt handling in alpha idle loop
> - added ack from Geert
> - fixed stable email address, sorry :-/
>
> This time I built tested everywhere but: h8300 (compiler internal error),
> and
K_CPU_UNBOUND.
>
> Fix it by additionally testing %GCWQ_DISASSOCIATED.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo
> Reported-by: "Paul E. McKenney"
> LKML-Refence: <20120721213656.ga7...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> This should fix it.
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 10:12:21AM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Currently, all workqueue cpu hotplug operations run off
> CPU_PRI_WORKQUEUE which is higher than normal notifiers. This is to
> ensure that workqueue is up and running while bringing up a CPU before
> other notifiers try to use workqueue
65 matches
Mail list logo
