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:4.123 / U:0.568 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site