Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 15:31:03 +0100
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To: Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@intel.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Re: WARNING at kernel/workqueue.c:829
 wq_worker_waking_up+0x53/0x70()
Message-ID: <20140220143102.GA12948@krava.brq.redhat.com>
References: <20140213124059.GA2908@krava.brq.redhat.com>
 <20140217171900.GB29173@redhat.com>
 <20140218224907.GG31892@mtj.dyndns.org>
 <530602FA.1020103@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <530602FA.1020103@intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 09:28:26PM +0800, Lan Tianyu wrote:
> On 02/19/2014 06:49 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 06:19:00PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >>acpi_processor_set_throttling() plays with set_cpus_allowed_ptr(current),
> >>this is obviously wrong, and the worker is bound.
> >
> >Umm... yeah, anything running on workqueues shouldn't be diddling with
> >cpu affinity.  The function even has /* FIXME: use work_on_cpu() */ in
> >it.  I suppose it's about time to actually implement that?
> >
> >Thanks.
> >
> 
> Hi Jiri:
> 	Could you try this patch which reworks ACPI processor throttling
> with work_on_cpu()?

hum, I've got difficulties to apply it..

[jolsa@krava2 linux-perf]$ git am /tmp/wq/
Applying: WARNING at kernel/workqueue.c:829 wq_worker_waking_up+0x53/0x70()
fatal: corrupt patch at line 8
Patch failed at 0001 WARNING at kernel/workqueue.c:829 wq_worker_waking_up+0x53/0x70()

jirka
--
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/