Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935041AbZARSZh (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jan 2009 13:25:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S934464AbZARSY7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jan 2009 13:24:59 -0500 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.158]:25717 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934338AbZARSY6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jan 2009 13:24:58 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=hb4RVAQVrK85POZQTNKjc4gkuFfVVVRf4XUjdOdoRTX+kG9YXfy6y7pk5oKkLlWswt 2YycRiC9H06vtcNJtI8M8EATRxIzLcLAFP8LlRbsUbPmd1PxDjTyMEvdOZgE4QT4u9wk I2NIE6O5ZxzdW96vilBuuHZRxuGAF4CvuJvDc= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <4966897E.5020302@free.fr> <20090111024945.GC7077@elte.hu> <20090114020040.GA19806@wotan.suse.de> Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 21:24:55 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: next-20090107: WARNING: at kernel/sched.c:4435 sub_preempt_count From: Alexey Zaytsev To: Nick Piggin Cc: Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Laurent Riffard , Kernel development list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1714 Lines: 44 On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 21:22, Alexey Zaytsev wrote: > Hi. > > On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 05:00, Nick Piggin wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 03:49:45AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> * Alexey Zaytsev wrote: >>> >>> > One more instance of http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123134586202636&w=2 >>> > Added Ingo Molnar to CC. >>> >>> added Nick on Cc:. Nick, it's about: >>> >>> > commit 7317d7b87edb41a9135e30be1ec3f7ef817c53dd >>> > Author: Nick Piggin >>> > Date: Tue Sep 30 20:50:27 2008 +1000 >>> > >>> > sched: improve preempt debugging >>> >>> causing a seemingly spurious warning. >> >> I don't know how it is spurious... Presumably the sequence _would_ have >> caused preempt count to go negative if the bkl were not held... >> >> __do_softirq does a __local_bh_disable on entry, and it seems like the >> _local_bh_enable on exit is what causes this warning. So something is >> unbalanced somehow. Or is it some weird thing we do in early boot that >> I am missing? >> >> Can you put in some printks around these functions in early boot to >> get an idea of what preempt_count is doing? > > Sorry for the delay. I was busy and forgot about this issue. > The warning does not show in -rc2 any more. Was it fixed, or > just shadowed by something? > Uhg, right Ingo pushed his revert to Linus. Should have looked into the changelog before posting, not after. -- 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/