* Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> wrote:
> The NOHZ patch contains a check for softirqs pending when a CPU goes
> idle. The BUG is unrelated to NOHZ, it just was made visible by the
> NOHZ patch. The BUG showed up mainly on P4 / hyperthreading enabled
> machines which lead the investigations into the wrong direction in the
> first place. The real cause is in cond_resched_softirq():
>
> cond_resched_softirq() is enabling softirqs without invoking the
> softirq daemon when softirqs are pending. This leads to the warning
> message in the NOHZ idle code:
good find!
> raw_local_irq_disable();
> - _local_bh_enable();
> + local_bh_enable();
> raw_local_irq_enable();
hm, i think this should be done without having irqs disabled?
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
