On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:35:33AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 02/05/2015 10:34 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >> > Did I actually need to be > >> > onlining/offlining CPUs to hit the splat that Sedat was reporting? > > Yep, you do need to offline at least one CPU to hit that splat. > > Heh, do we need a debugging mode that will randomly offline/online CPUs? :) For that, kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c and kernel/locking/locktorture.c are your friends. ;-) The problem is that I only run RCU-relevant combinations of Kconfigs, which means that I missed the ones that Sedat used to find this problem. So I guess it is a good thing that others run -next testing. Thanx, Paul -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
