----- "Michael Holzheu" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hello Dave,
> 
> Currently for "bt -a" also swapper tasks on offline CPUs are printed
> (at least on s390). Wouldn't it be better to only print a backtrace,
> when the task is running on an online CPU?
> 
> My suggestion would be to implement that with the following patch
> by only setting the panic threads for online CPUs. I also attached a
> second alternative patch that fills the active set array only with
> tasks on online CPUs.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Michael

I'd prefer not to leave them out of the various internal task arrays,
especially the active_set[] array.  Regardless of their on/offline
status, they do still exist as tasks, have runqueues, etc.

If you're just worried about "bt -a", then why not just catch
the offline status in the for loop inside "if (active)" section
of cmd_bt()?  Or just indicate some kind of "OFFLINE" status in
the output?

Dave


> ---
>  task.c |    8 ++++++--
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> --- a/task.c
> +++ b/task.c
> @@ -5658,8 +5658,12 @@ populate_panic_threads(void)
>          struct task_context *tc;
>  
>       if (get_active_set()) {
> -             for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++) 
> -                     tt->panic_threads[i] = tt->active_set[i];
> +             for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++) {
> +                     if (kt->cpu_flags[i] & ONLINE)
> +                             tt->panic_threads[i] = tt->active_set[i];
> +                     else
> +                             tt->panic_threads[i] = 0;
> +             }
>               return;
>       }
> 
> --
> Crash-utility mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility

--
Crash-utility mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility

Reply via email to