Received: by 2002:a25:8b91:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id j17csp1185066ybl; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 03:10:22 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwcZmW9GIN9O66wamTOR/N8uDQUp2fji/pp8p4I5NBdLmsj0JD1xfTe7iQXkH7mD0O3zojG X-Received: by 2002:aca:ef85:: with SMTP id n127mr3184784oih.54.1575371422864; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 03:10:22 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1575371422; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=H3l5ql2bZQfkcSQjhGmUCeSozZcuorMDgAk5Wlbn6P7jsY8LrqXvamoO1qGtZboXQv 1+J48X9SK3i7N22Z1dl7ee/JclEQw4aH91SbVyfsDtiVWBvkST6MvdAURfmltLfTUqDk rx1PF6ba6NvtLLTNG/fipbngElpmtIsF/56e63mWl1cLM7n2YoCoPRp3J8byk2nPl0+S fAHEtSZP8mfOkDd7M+2vTrIfBqLQ19RuONMhGIyOnWPz17WlD4/VhuyJgnJmLmPtT09J q00z7MBleB1QO+9zRPV5uPL31dHxxF7wznN3/DklcSYdSP449H6cxOGC9RQTdOAfLPtb a+5w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:to:subject; bh=hA14wWTjB2cyaBMeKJXC3/33FpfXXK+J30MZKEO4ajU=; b=SxxwV/JcLa2NhvShnytoFyAivJaIK/vgMSiQQ2/9xL+SxwAbSwhrl8lwKZok0ZLI1a HPhz9Q04DfqAVweGsPamw4/Mr1JRy7nbPqEvxOOeGOjEQugdwbhMORG0wZN4y84yW4jG 44Wv1xkFBydm+IxgO/pLTItWBNxOg2Y/QPyg9D2YD5xYmCMvC3rjLYkrlKmRb7YGTH2G PewUPMBNAZbIdoTaW44QFLIvntoemrhbiYaTZ64QqLPBY7GjsJrUQ7MXGOPO2E5mJ99a 3tSJjVBuv9iT6SciToflaVxRizwefD/tCOGR1bXNWwqu4OwxvheplNxTVaGPr79KALrn F+Ww== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 8si1084983oip.91.2019.12.03.03.10.05; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 03:10:22 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726086AbfLCLJ2 (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 3 Dec 2019 06:09:28 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:40460 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725838AbfLCLJ2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Dec 2019 06:09:28 -0500 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B20430E; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 03:09:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.1.194.37] (e113632-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.194.37]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D85FA3F68E; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 03:09:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Crash in fair scheduler To: Dietmar Eggemann , "Schmid, Carsten" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "peterz@infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" References: <1575364273836.74450@mentor.com> <564e45cb-8230-9c3d-24a8-b58e6e88349f@arm.com> <944927a7-b578-c6f9-a73d-25c5b0a39adb@arm.com> From: Valentin Schneider Message-ID: Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 11:09:25 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <944927a7-b578-c6f9-a73d-25c5b0a39adb@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/12/2019 10:40, Dietmar Eggemann wrote: > On 03/12/2019 11:30, Valentin Schneider wrote: >> On 03/12/2019 09:11, Schmid, Carsten wrote: > > [...] > >> That looks a lot like a recent issue we've had, see >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191108131909.428842459@infradead.org/ >> >> The issue is caused by >> >> 67692435c411 ("sched: Rework pick_next_task() slow-path") >> >> which 5.4-rc2 has (without the fix which landed in -rc7) but 4.14 really >> shouldn't, unless the kernel you're using has had core scheduling somehow >> backported to it? >> >> I've only scraped the surface but I'd like to first ask: can you reproduce >> the issue on v5.4 final ? > > Can't be. 4.14.86 does not have ("sched: Rework pick_next_task() > slow-path"). > Right, which is why I wondered if the kernel under test had had that backported to it for some reason (e.g. core scheduling). Peter pointed out that this is a slightly different issue (nr_running matches the rbt), so this is probably unrelated.