On 02/20/2014 02:10 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 02/17/2014 09:26 PM, Michael wang wrote:
>> On 02/17/2014 05:20 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> [snip]
>> static void switched_to_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
>> {
>>-if (!p->se.on_rq)
>>+struct sched_entity
On 02/20/2014 12:16 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[snip]
>>
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> index 235cfa7..4445e56 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -7317,7 +7317,11 @@ static void switched_from_fair(struct rq *rq, struct
>>
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 01:10:22PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 02/17/2014 09:26 PM, Michael wang wrote:
> >On 02/17/2014 05:20 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >[snip]
> > static void switched_to_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> > {
> >-if (!p->se.on_rq)
> >+
On 02/17/2014 09:26 PM, Michael wang wrote:
On 02/17/2014 05:20 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[snip]
>> static void switched_to_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
>> {
>>- if (!p->se.on_rq)
>>+ struct sched_entity *se = >se;
>>+#ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
>>+
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 04:11:09PM +0800, Michael wang wrote:
> > While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running latest -next
> > kernel, I've
> > stumbled on the following:
>
> I've reproduced the same issue with tip/master, and below patch fixed the
> problem on my box along with
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 04:11:09PM +0800, Michael wang wrote:
While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running latest -next
kernel, I've
stumbled on the following:
I've reproduced the same issue with tip/master, and below patch fixed the
problem on my box along with some rcu
On 02/17/2014 09:26 PM, Michael wang wrote:
On 02/17/2014 05:20 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[snip]
static void switched_to_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
{
- if (!p-se.on_rq)
+ struct sched_entity *se = p-se;
+#ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
+ se-depth = se-parent
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 01:10:22PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
On 02/17/2014 09:26 PM, Michael wang wrote:
On 02/17/2014 05:20 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[snip]
static void switched_to_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
{
-if (!p-se.on_rq)
+struct sched_entity *se =
On 02/20/2014 12:16 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[snip]
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 235cfa7..4445e56 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -7317,7 +7317,11 @@ static void switched_from_fair(struct rq *rq, struct
task_struct *p)
*/
On 02/20/2014 02:10 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
On 02/17/2014 09:26 PM, Michael wang wrote:
On 02/17/2014 05:20 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[snip]
static void switched_to_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
{
-if (!p-se.on_rq)
+struct sched_entity *se = p-se;
+#ifdef
On 02/18/2014 05:07 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
[snip]
>
> I *think* it works. There seems to be another sched issue that causes
> lockups,
> so I can't say for certain that this one doesn't occur anymore.
>
> I'm still working on collecting data for the other issue, I'll mail
> about it soon.
On 02/17/2014 05:20 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[snip]
>> static void switched_to_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
>> {
>> -if (!p->se.on_rq)
>> +struct sched_entity *se = >se;
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
>> +se->depth = se->parent ? se->parent->depth + 1 : 0;
>>
On 02/17/2014 03:11 AM, Michael wang wrote:
Hi, Sasha
On 02/16/2014 07:27 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
Hi folks,
While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running latest -next
kernel, I've
stumbled on the following:
I've reproduced the same issue with tip/master, and below patch fixed
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 04:11:09PM +0800, Michael wang wrote:
> BTW, I reproduced it by steps:
> 1. change current to RT
> 2. move to a different depth cpu-cgroup
> 3. change it back to FAIR
>
> Seems like it was caused by that RT has no task_move_group() implemented
> which could maintain depth,
Hi, Sasha
On 02/16/2014 07:27 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running latest -next
> kernel, I've
> stumbled on the following:
I've reproduced the same issue with tip/master, and below patch fixed the
problem on my box along with some
Hi, Sasha
On 02/16/2014 07:27 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
Hi folks,
While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running latest -next
kernel, I've
stumbled on the following:
I've reproduced the same issue with tip/master, and below patch fixed the
problem on my box along with some rcu
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 04:11:09PM +0800, Michael wang wrote:
BTW, I reproduced it by steps:
1. change current to RT
2. move to a different depth cpu-cgroup
3. change it back to FAIR
Seems like it was caused by that RT has no task_move_group() implemented
which could maintain depth, and
On 02/17/2014 03:11 AM, Michael wang wrote:
Hi, Sasha
On 02/16/2014 07:27 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
Hi folks,
While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running latest -next
kernel, I've
stumbled on the following:
I've reproduced the same issue with tip/master, and below patch fixed
On 02/17/2014 05:20 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[snip]
static void switched_to_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
{
-if (!p-se.on_rq)
+struct sched_entity *se = p-se;
+#ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
+se-depth = se-parent ? se-parent-depth + 1 : 0;
+#endif
+if
On 02/18/2014 05:07 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
[snip]
I *think* it works. There seems to be another sched issue that causes
lockups,
so I can't say for certain that this one doesn't occur anymore.
I'm still working on collecting data for the other issue, I'll mail
about it soon.
Thanks for
On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 06:27:52PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running latest -next
> kernel, I've
> stumbled on the following:
>
> [ 522.645288] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
> 0150
> [
On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 06:27:52PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
Hi folks,
While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running latest -next
kernel, I've
stumbled on the following:
[ 522.645288] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
0150
[
On 02/15/2014 06:27 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
Hi folks,
While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running latest -next
kernel, I've
stumbled on the following:
As soon as I've finished writing that mail I've hit it again, with a different (but similar) stack
trace.
[ 770.993016]
Hi folks,
While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running latest -next
kernel, I've
stumbled on the following:
[ 522.645288] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
0150
[ 522.646271] IP: [] check_preempt_wakeup+0x11f/0x210
[ 522.646976] PGD
Hi folks,
While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running latest -next
kernel, I've
stumbled on the following:
[ 522.645288] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
0150
[ 522.646271] IP: [81186c6f] check_preempt_wakeup+0x11f/0x210
[
On 02/15/2014 06:27 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
Hi folks,
While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running latest -next
kernel, I've
stumbled on the following:
As soon as I've finished writing that mail I've hit it again, with a different (but similar) stack
trace.
[ 770.993016]
26 matches
Mail list logo
