On Tue, 2020-06-09 at 23:03 +0300, Ramon Fried wrote: > On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 8:20 PM Tom Zanussi <zanussi@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > > Hi Ramon, > > > > On Tue, 2020-06-09 at 20:14 +0300, Ramon Fried wrote: > > > > > > On June 9, 2020 8:10:43 PM GMT+03:00, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior < > > > bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 2020-06-09 20:07:06 [+0300], Ramon Fried wrote: > > > > > Indeed > > > > > I'm truly sorry, I thought our crash kernel is configured as > > > > > RT > > > > > as > > > > > > > > well. > > > > > so, as I understand, if I build the RT kernel without preempt > > > > > enabled > > > > > > > > I can hit this bug? > > > > > > > > Don't worry, I should have been better with the details in the > > > > log. > > > > > > > > So you should _always_ hit the warning/bug if you compile a > > > > kernel > > > > without SMP and RT. If you enable one of these then everything > > > > should > > > > be > > > > fine. > > > > > > Would there be a fix for that? > > > > I haven't tested the fix yet, but can you try the below patch and > > see > > if it fixes your broken case? > > > > [PATCH] tasklet: Fix UP case for tasklet CHAINED state > > > > commit 62d0a2a30cd0 (tasklet: Address a race resulting in > > double-enqueue) addresses a problem that can result in a tasklet > > being > > enqueued on two cpus at the same time by combining the RUN flag > > with a > > new CHAINED flag, and relies on the combination to be present in > > order > > to zero it out, which can never happen on (!SMP and > > !PREEMPT_RT_FULL) > > because the RUN flag is SMP/PREEMPT_RT_FULL-only. > > > > So make sure the above commit is only applied for the SMP || > > PREEMPT_RT_FULL case. > > > > Signed-off-by: Tom Zanussi <zanussi@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > kernel/softirq.c | 6 ++++++ > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/softirq.c b/kernel/softirq.c > > index 73dae64bfc9c..9bad7a16dc61 100644 > > --- a/kernel/softirq.c > > +++ b/kernel/softirq.c > > @@ -947,10 +947,12 @@ static void __tasklet_schedule_common(struct > > tasklet_struct *t, > > * is locked before adding it to the list. > > */ > > if (test_bit(TASKLET_STATE_SCHED, &t->state)) { > > +#if defined(CONFIG_SMP) || defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL) > > if (test_and_set_bit(TASKLET_STATE_CHAINED, &t- > > >state)) > > { > > tasklet_unlock(t); > > return; > > } > > +#endif > > t->next = NULL; > > *head->tail = t; > > head->tail = &(t->next); > > @@ -1044,7 +1046,11 @@ static void tasklet_action_common(struct > > softirq_action *a, > > again: > > t->func(t->data); > > > > +#if defined(CONFIG_SMP) || defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL) > > while (cmpxchg(&t->state, TASKLET_STATEF_RC, 0) != > > TASKLET_STATEF_RC) { > > +#else > > + while (!tasklet_tryunlock(t)) { > > +#endif > > /* > > * If it got disabled meanwhile, bail out: > > */ > > -- > > 2.17.1 > > > > > > Tested-By: Ramon Fried <rfried.dev@xxxxxxxxx> > > Working, thanks a lot. OK, great, thanks for testing and reporting this. Tom