lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: BUG: using smp_processor_id() during suspend with 2.6.25-rc8
On Tue 2008-04-08 00:33:48, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Apr 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > > The mce resume is a sysdev.
> > > sysdevs were always supposed to run completely with interrupts off. If they
> > > don't anymore that's some kind of higher level resume code bug which you need
> > > to fix there, not hack around in the low level code.
> > They are executed with interrupts disabled, on one CPU.
>
> So, any idea why mce_resume() -> mce_init() -> debug_smp_processor_id()
> triggers the warning? Apparently preempt_count is zero, irqs_disabled()
> returns false, and cpumask_of_cpu() is not equal to current->cpus_allowed.

We are single-threaded because we 'unplugged' all the other cpus...
but I'm not sure the BUG() code realises that...

> So there clearly is a bug somewhere.
>
> > > Obviously turning on preemption anywhere around the machine check is
> > > fatal because it touches CPU state and if you reschedule you could
> > > switch to another CPU and change or access the wrong CPU's state.
> > FWIW, at the point when sysdevs are resumed we are single-threaded.
>
> Is that really relevant here? We still could be switched over to another
> CPU, and that would break things.

There are no other CPUs.

--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-10 11:49    [W:0.073 / U:3.132 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site