Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-50232-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Sender: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 07:29:16 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>
Cc: Helge Deller <deller@kernel.org>,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] workqueue: Fix kernel panic on CPU hot-unplug
Message-ID: <Zb0mbHlIud_bqftx@slm.duckdns.org>
References: <ZbqfMR_mVLaSCj4Q@carbonx1>
 <ZbrJq3X63hIMkbl2@slm.duckdns.org>
 <8a266076-b3dc-4a39-aac4-089e2ef77da3@gmx.de>
 <ZbvM1V8CYNeds14r@slm.duckdns.org>
 <e6916a78-7872-442d-922d-31ea3920da4f@gmx.de>
 <ZbxHuS6vOc0MB7-R@slm.duckdns.org>
 <983189ec-e8fc-41ef-bad7-cfebad20ac83@gmx.de>
 <f75e7606-0904-4e97-b337-e8f74843e87d@gmx.de>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f75e7606-0904-4e97-b337-e8f74843e87d@gmx.de>

Hello, Helge.

On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 09:41:38AM +0100, Helge Deller wrote:
> In a second step I extended your patch to print the present
> and online CPUs too. Below is the relevant dmesg part.
> 
> Note, that on parisc the second CPU will be activated later in the
> boot process, after the kernel has the inventory.
> This I think differs vs x86, where all CPUs are available earlier
> in the boot process.
> ...
> [    0.000000] XXX workqueue_init_early: possible_cpus=ffff  present=0001  online=0001
..
> [    0.228080] XXX workqueue_init: possible_cpus=ffff  present=0001  online=0001
..
> [    0.263466] XXX workqueue_init_topology: possible_cpus=ffff  present=0001  online=0001

So, what's bothersome is that when the wq_dump.py script printing each cpu's
pwq, it's only printing for CPU 0 and 1. The for_each_possible_cpu() drgn
helper reads cpu_possible_mask from the kernel and iterates that, so that
most likely indicates at some point the cpu_possible_mask becomes 0x3
instead of the one used during boot - 0xffff, which is problematic.

Can you please sprinkle more printks to find out whether and when the
cpu_possible_mask changes during boot?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun