Oleg Nesterov napsal(a): > On 05/08, Andrew Morton wrote: >> On Tue, 08 May 2007 10:57:35 +0200 Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> this occured in dmesg during resuming from hwsusp in 2.6.21-mm1 (captured >>> through netconsole). Perfectly reproducible, it simply happens each time I >>> try it. >> Let's cc Oleg. >> >>> usb_endpoint usbdev5.1_ep00: PM: resume from 0, parent usb5 still 2 >>> ------------[ cut here ]------------ >>> kernel BUG at /home/l/latest/xxx/kernel/workqueue.c:106! >>> invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] >>> SMP >>> Modules linked in: ipv6 floppy ohci1394 ieee1394 parport_pc parport usbhid >>> ehci_hcd pata_acpi ff_memless sr_mod cdrom >>> CPU: 1 >>> EIP: 0060:[<c0132161>] Not tainted VLI >>> EFLAGS: 00010046 (2.6.21-mm1 #272) >>> EIP is at insert_work+0x6d/0x71 >>> eax: c1c3b3c0 ebx: c1814aa0 ecx: 00000001 edx: c1814aa0 >>> esi: c1c3b340 edi: 00000282 ebp: c04d2f68 esp: c04d2f50 >>> ds: 007b es: 007b fs: 00d8 gs: 0000 ss: 0068 >>> Process swapper (pid: 0, ti=c04d2000 task=c1c26030 task.ti=c1c20000) >>> Stack: c4685f54 c18148ac c04d2f98 c013816f c1c3b340 c1814aa0 c04d2f88 c013256c >>> 00000066 c1814880 c1c5e000 c04d2fc4 c01325a1 >>> c1c5e000 00000100 c012ba35 00000000 c04d2fb8 c01333f4 Call Trace: >>> [<c0104f27>] [<c0104fe2>] show_stack_log_lvl+0xa5/0xca >>> show_registers+0x1e2/0x2da >>> [<c01053f5>] [<c010559a>] do_trap+0x84/0xaa >>> do_invalid_op+0x88/0x92 >>> [<c0378662>] [<c013256c>] __queue_work+0x22/0x33 >>> delayed_work_timer_fn+0x24/0x2a >>> [<c012ba35>] [<c01288a9>] __do_softirq+0x75/0xe6 >>> do_softirq+0x63/0xac >>> [<c0128713>] [<c0116d7e>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x5c/0x88 >>> apic_timer_interrupt+0x28/0x30 >> hm, how come it's so messy? I have no idea, this is how it appeared in the `nc -ul' output... > queue_delayed_work(). > > Probably, cancel_delayed_work(&delayed_work->work) was called with the ->timer > pending. This is wrong, cancel_delayed_work() clears _PENDING unconditionally, > that is why the comment says > > it is expected that, prior to calling cancel_work_sync(), the caller has > arranged for the work to not be requeued. > > (Just in case, after make-cancel_rearming_delayed_work-reliable.patch this is still > wrong (as documented) to do cancel_delayed_work() before cancel_delayed_timer(), > but should work correctly). > > ata_port_flush_task() and ata_port_detach() do this, I sent the patch to fix this > twice. The last one is > > [PATCH -mm] libata-core: convert to use cancel_rearming_delayed_work() > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=117840349108505 > > > Jiri, any chance you can re-test with the patch below? Yes. In the meantime I investigated, that the regression is between broken-out-2007-04-28-05-06 and special -js edition: I guess it's time to end the staircase experiment in -mm. http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/js.bz2 is my current rollup (against 2.6.21) minus staircase and related things. I don't know if it's possible to dig out the patch list from it, otherwise, 2.6.21-mm1 list may be used... > --- OLD/kernel/workqueue.c~ 2007-05-06 00:01:06.000000000 +0400 > +++ OLD/kernel/workqueue.c 2007-05-08 14:50:39.000000000 +0400 > @@ -103,7 +103,10 @@ static inline void set_wq_data(struct wo > { > unsigned long new; > > - BUG_ON(!work_pending(work)); > + if (!work_pending(work)) { > + printk(KERN_ERR "BUG: set_wq_data "); > + print_symbol("%s\n", (unsigned long) work->func); > + } > > new = (unsigned long) cwq | (1UL << WORK_STRUCT_PENDING); > new |= WORK_STRUCT_FLAG_MASK & *work_data_bits(work); building and will report, -- http://www.fi.muni.cz/~xslaby/ Jiri Slaby faculty of informatics, masaryk university, brno, cz e-mail: jirislaby gmail com, gpg pubkey fingerprint: B674 9967 0407 CE62 ACC8 22A0 32CC 55C3 39D4 7A7E _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
