On Mon, 28 Jul 2014 13:55:17 -0500 (CDT) Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Sasha Levin wrote:
>
> > This patch doesn't interact well with my fuzzing setup. I'm seeing
> > the following:
> >
> > [ 490.446927] BUG: using __this_cpu_read() in preemptible [00000000] code: kworker/16:1/7368
> > [ 490.447909] caller is __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x13/0x20
>
> __this_cpu_read() from vmstat_update is only called from a kworker that
> is bound to a single cpu. A false positive?
schedule_delayed_work() uses system_wq. The comment in workqueue.h says
* system_wq is the one used by schedule[_delayed]_work[_on]().
* Multi-CPU multi-threaded. There are users which expect relatively
* short queue flush time. Don't queue works which can run for too
* long.
but the code itself does
system_wq = alloc_workqueue("events", 0, 0);
ie: it didn't pass WQ_UNBOUND in the flags.
Tejun, wazzup?
Also, Sasha's report showed this:
[ 490.464613] kernel BUG at mm/vmstat.c:1278!
That's your VM_BUG_ON() in vmstat_update(). That ain't no false
positive!
Is this code expecting that schedule_delayed_work() will schedule the
work on the current CPU? I don't think it will do that. Maybe you
should be looking at schedule_delayed_work_on().
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>