Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 18 Jan 2009 21:24:55 +0300 | Subject | Re: next-20090107: WARNING: at kernel/sched.c:4435 sub_preempt_count | From | Alexey Zaytsev <> |
| |
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 21:22, Alexey Zaytsev <alexey.zaytsev@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi. > > On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 05:00, Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 03:49:45AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> * Alexey Zaytsev <alexey.zaytsev@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> > One more instance of http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123134586202636&w=2 >>> > Added Ingo Molnar to CC. >>> >>> added Nick on Cc:. Nick, it's about: >>> >>> > commit 7317d7b87edb41a9135e30be1ec3f7ef817c53dd >>> > Author: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> >>> > Date: Tue Sep 30 20:50:27 2008 +1000 >>> > >>> > sched: improve preempt debugging >>> >>> causing a seemingly spurious warning. >> >> I don't know how it is spurious... Presumably the sequence _would_ have >> caused preempt count to go negative if the bkl were not held... >> >> __do_softirq does a __local_bh_disable on entry, and it seems like the >> _local_bh_enable on exit is what causes this warning. So something is >> unbalanced somehow. Or is it some weird thing we do in early boot that >> I am missing? >> >> Can you put in some printks around these functions in early boot to >> get an idea of what preempt_count is doing? > > Sorry for the delay. I was busy and forgot about this issue. > The warning does not show in -rc2 any more. Was it fixed, or > just shadowed by something? >
Uhg, right Ingo pushed his revert to Linus. Should have looked into the changelog before posting, not after.
| |