All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>
Cc: kernel test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>, LKP <lkp@01.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	wfg@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [sched/core] 8a8c69c327: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 8 at kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3548 lock_release
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 15:09:09 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170317140909.yfwvqdouwfad26i3@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANRm+Cxb0=KDpbP+R95sbY=MjxnGkk1Q-13s1VQ2q_Q0DQ+V2w@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 09:24:11PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> 2017-03-17 21:02 GMT+08:00 Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>:
> > 2017-03-17 4:02 GMT+08:00 kernel test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>:
> >> Greetings,
> >>
> >> 0day kernel testing robot got the below dmesg and the first bad commit is
> >>
> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git sched/core
> >>
> >> commit 8a8c69c32778865affcedc2111bb5d938b50516f
> >> Author:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> >> AuthorDate: Tue Oct 4 16:04:35 2016 +0200
> >> Commit:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> >> CommitDate: Thu Mar 16 09:46:22 2017 +0100
> >>
> >>     sched/core: Add rq->lock wrappers
> >>
> >>     The missing update_rq_clock() check can work with partial rq->lock
> >>     wrappery, since a missing wrapper can cause the warning to not be
> >>     emitted when it should have, but cannot cause the warning to trigger
> >>     when it should not have.
> >>
> >>     The duplicate update_rq_clock() check however can cause false warnings
> >>     to trigger. Therefore add more comprehensive rq->lock wrappery.
> >>
> >>     Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> >>     Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> >>     Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
> >>     Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> >>     Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> >>     Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> >
> > Please refer to: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/16/1131
> 
> I have another version of patch which utilizes raw_spin_lock_irqsave()
> instead of rq_lock_irqsave() in __balance_callback() as before, which
> one do you like, Peterz?

Hurm.. the raw_spin_lock_irqsave() one I suspect. No point in pinning
and then unpinning.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [sched/core] 8a8c69c327: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 8 at kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3548 lock_release
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 15:09:09 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170317140909.yfwvqdouwfad26i3@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANRm+Cxb0=KDpbP+R95sbY=MjxnGkk1Q-13s1VQ2q_Q0DQ+V2w@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1815 bytes --]

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 09:24:11PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> 2017-03-17 21:02 GMT+08:00 Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>:
> > 2017-03-17 4:02 GMT+08:00 kernel test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>:
> >> Greetings,
> >>
> >> 0day kernel testing robot got the below dmesg and the first bad commit is
> >>
> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git sched/core
> >>
> >> commit 8a8c69c32778865affcedc2111bb5d938b50516f
> >> Author:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> >> AuthorDate: Tue Oct 4 16:04:35 2016 +0200
> >> Commit:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> >> CommitDate: Thu Mar 16 09:46:22 2017 +0100
> >>
> >>     sched/core: Add rq->lock wrappers
> >>
> >>     The missing update_rq_clock() check can work with partial rq->lock
> >>     wrappery, since a missing wrapper can cause the warning to not be
> >>     emitted when it should have, but cannot cause the warning to trigger
> >>     when it should not have.
> >>
> >>     The duplicate update_rq_clock() check however can cause false warnings
> >>     to trigger. Therefore add more comprehensive rq->lock wrappery.
> >>
> >>     Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> >>     Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> >>     Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
> >>     Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> >>     Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> >>     Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> >
> > Please refer to: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/16/1131
> 
> I have another version of patch which utilizes raw_spin_lock_irqsave()
> instead of rq_lock_irqsave() in __balance_callback() as before, which
> one do you like, Peterz?

Hurm.. the raw_spin_lock_irqsave() one I suspect. No point in pinning
and then unpinning.



  reply	other threads:[~2017-03-17 14:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-16 20:02 [sched/core] 8a8c69c327: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 8 at kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3548 lock_release kernel test robot
2017-03-16 20:02 ` kernel test robot
2017-03-17 13:02 ` Wanpeng Li
2017-03-17 13:24   ` Wanpeng Li
2017-03-17 14:09     ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2017-03-17 14:09       ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-17 14:13       ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-17 14:13         ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-19  1:55         ` Wanpeng Li

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170317140909.yfwvqdouwfad26i3@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=kernellwp@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkp@01.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=wfg@linux.intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.