On Monday 09 November 2009, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 15:02 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Nov 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > > ok, then my observation should not apply. > > > > I think it _IS_ releated because the worker_thread is CPU affine and > > the debug_smp_processor_id() check does: > > > > if (cpumask_equal(¤t->cpus_allowed, cpumask_of(this_cpu))) > > > > which prevents that usage of smp_processor_id() in ksoftirqd and > > keventd in preempt enabled regions is warned on. > > > > We saw exaclty the same back trace with fd21073 (sched: Fix affinity > > logic in select_task_rq_fair()). > > > > Rafael, can you please add a printk to debug_smp_processor_id() so we > > can see on which CPU we are running ? I suspect we are on the wrong > > one. > > I wonder if that's not intimately related to the problem I had, namely > newidle balancing offline CPUs as they're coming up, making a mess of > cpu enumeration. Very likely. What did you do to fix it? Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
