lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Feb]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: BUG in 2.6.20-rt8
From
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 07:27:47 +0100

>
> * Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > I got the following running stock 2.6.20-rt8 on an 4-CPU 1.8GHz
> > Opteron box. The machine continued to run a few rounds of kernbench
> > and LTP. Looks a bit scary -- a tasklet was "stolen" from
> > __tasklet_action().
> >
> > Thoughts? In the meantime, kicking it off again to see if it repeats.
>
> > BUG: at kernel/softirq.c:559 __tasklet_action()
>
> this seems to happen very sporadically. Seems to happen more likely on
> hyperthreading CPUs. It is very likely caused by the
> redesign-tasklet-locking-to-be-sane patch below - which is a quick hack
> of mine from early -rt days. Can you see any obvious bug in it? The
> cmpxchg logic is certainly a bit ... tricky, locking-wise.

Ingo, please don't use cmpxchg() in generic code, we support several
processors that simply cannot do it.

Instead of saying "it's just something special in -rt for now", take
it out now so that what you do eventually push upstream does get
tested.

Thanks.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-02-25 07:41    [W:0.103 / U:24.656 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site