All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: kernel test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, LKP <lkp@01.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	wfg@linux.intel.com, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: d1fc031747 ("sched/wait: assert the wait_queue_head lock is .."):  EIP: __wake_up_common
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 17:03:00 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171213170300.b0bb26900dd00641819b4872@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5a31cac7.i9WLKx5al8+rBn73%fengguang.wu@intel.com>

On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 08:50:15 +0800 kernel test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com> wrote:

> 0day kernel testing robot got the below dmesg and the first bad commit is
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
> 
> commit d1fc0317472217762fa7741260ca464077b4c877
> Author:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> AuthorDate: Wed Dec 13 11:52:12 2017 +1100
> Commit:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> CommitDate: Wed Dec 13 16:04:58 2017 +1100
> 
>     sched/wait: assert the wait_queue_head lock is held in __wake_up_common
>     
>     Better ensure we actually hold the lock using lockdep than just commenting
>     on it.  Due to the various exported _locked interfaces it is far too easy
>     to get the locking wrong.

I'm probably sitting on an older version.  I've dropped

epoll: use the waitqueue lock to protect ep->wq
sched/wait: assert the wait_queue_head lock is held in __wake_up_common

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: kernel test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, LKP <lkp@01.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	wfg@linux.intel.com, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: d1fc031747 ("sched/wait: assert the wait_queue_head lock is .."):  EIP: __wake_up_common
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 17:03:00 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171213170300.b0bb26900dd00641819b4872@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5a31cac7.i9WLKx5al8+rBn73%fengguang.wu@intel.com>

On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 08:50:15 +0800 kernel test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com> wrote:

> 0day kernel testing robot got the below dmesg and the first bad commit is
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
> 
> commit d1fc0317472217762fa7741260ca464077b4c877
> Author:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> AuthorDate: Wed Dec 13 11:52:12 2017 +1100
> Commit:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> CommitDate: Wed Dec 13 16:04:58 2017 +1100
> 
>     sched/wait: assert the wait_queue_head lock is held in __wake_up_common
>     
>     Better ensure we actually hold the lock using lockdep than just commenting
>     on it.  Due to the various exported _locked interfaces it is far too easy
>     to get the locking wrong.

I'm probably sitting on an older version.  I've dropped

epoll: use the waitqueue lock to protect ep->wq
sched/wait: assert the wait_queue_head lock is held in __wake_up_common

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: d1fc031747 ("sched/wait: assert the wait_queue_head lock is .."): EIP: __wake_up_common
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 17:03:00 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171213170300.b0bb26900dd00641819b4872@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5a31cac7.i9WLKx5al8+rBn73%fengguang.wu@intel.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 965 bytes --]

On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 08:50:15 +0800 kernel test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com> wrote:

> 0day kernel testing robot got the below dmesg and the first bad commit is
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
> 
> commit d1fc0317472217762fa7741260ca464077b4c877
> Author:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> AuthorDate: Wed Dec 13 11:52:12 2017 +1100
> Commit:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> CommitDate: Wed Dec 13 16:04:58 2017 +1100
> 
>     sched/wait: assert the wait_queue_head lock is held in __wake_up_common
>     
>     Better ensure we actually hold the lock using lockdep than just commenting
>     on it.  Due to the various exported _locked interfaces it is far too easy
>     to get the locking wrong.

I'm probably sitting on an older version.  I've dropped

epoll: use the waitqueue lock to protect ep->wq
sched/wait: assert the wait_queue_head lock is held in __wake_up_common

  reply	other threads:[~2017-12-14  1:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-12-14  0:50 d1fc031747 ("sched/wait: assert the wait_queue_head lock is .."): EIP: __wake_up_common kernel test robot
2017-12-14  0:50 ` kernel test robot
2017-12-14  1:03 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2017-12-14  1:03   ` Andrew Morton
2017-12-14  1:03   ` Andrew Morton
2017-12-14  4:58   ` Stephen Rothwell
2017-12-14  4:58     ` Stephen Rothwell
2017-12-14  4:58     ` Stephen Rothwell
2017-12-14 12:57   ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-12-14 12:57     ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-12-14 12:57     ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-12-14 12:58   ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-14 12:58     ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-14 12:58     ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-14 13:05     ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-14 13:05       ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-14 13:05       ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-14 13:10     ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-12-14 13:10       ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-12-14 13:10       ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-12-14 14:12       ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-14 14:12         ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-14 14:12         ` Matthew Wilcox

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=20171213170300.b0bb26900dd00641819b4872@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lkp@01.org \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    --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.