Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 26 Aug 2008 09:01:26 +0200 | | From | "Vegard Nossum" <> | | Subject | Re: [-mmotm] BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper |
| |
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 8:37 AM, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:09:25 -0400 "Ryan Hope" <rmh3093@gmail.com> wrote: > >> BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/1/0x00000002 >> Modules linked in: >> Pid: 1, comm: swapper Tainted: G W 2.6.27-rc4-zenmmotm1 #4 >> [<c057a0c7>] schedule+0x287/0x6d0 >> [<c03672e6>] vsnprintf+0x3a6/0x6c0 >> [<c057a92d>] schedule_timeout+0x7d/0xb0 >> [<c021e0c8>] __wake_up+0x38/0x50 >> [<c057a74a>] wait_for_common+0x8a/0x130 >> [<c0220ab0>] default_wake_function+0x0/0x10 >> [<c0237743>] call_usermodehelper_exec+0xc3/0xf0 >> [<c0362ede>] kobject_uevent_env+0x37e/0x3a0 >> [<c03d5921>] device_add+0x551/0x630 >> [<c03d5ac3>] device_create_vargs+0xb3/0xd0 >> [<c06ccc47>] microcode_intel_module_init+0x0/0x39 >> [<c03d5b0b>] device_create+0x2b/0x30 >> [<c0385f2e>] misc_register+0xbe/0x170 >> [<c02137d1>] microcode_init+0x21/0xf0 >> [<c0201336>] do_one_initcall+0x26/0x170 >> [<c021e0c8>] __wake_up+0x38/0x50 >> [<c0237c98>] insert_work+0x48/0x50 >> [<c02380a5>] __queue_work+0x25/0x40 >> [<c023812a>] queue_work_on+0x3a/0x50 >> [<c06c29bf>] kernel_init+0x170/0x251 >> [<c06c284f>] kernel_init+0x0/0x251 >> [<c0204157>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10 >> ======================= > > As a mad guess, I'd guess that someone changed get_online_cpus() so > that disables preemption (with a suitable config combination, perhaps). > Which would cause microcode_init()'s sysdev_driver_register() to run > in atomic context. > > But that's just a guess - I can't immediately see any change in there > which does this. Ingo, any theories?
Looks like the kernel was W-tainted already... so likely there was a BUG or a WARNING even before this. And I think this sort of warning can happen if a(nother) process was killed while preemption was off (e.g. a BUG() at the wrong moment). Ryan?
Vegard
-- "The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation." -- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
|  |