On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 10:32 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > Sure, but s/get_cpu_var/get_cpu_ptr first.
>
> Doh.
Ditto, box OTOH spotted the booboo instantly :)
-Mike
On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 10:32 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > Sure, but s/get_cpu_var/get_cpu_ptr first.
>
> Doh.
Ditto, box OTOH spotted the booboo instantly :)
-Mike
On 05/09/2017 10:26 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 09:45 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>
>>> Is it from this_cpu_ptr() in blk_stat_add()?
>>
>> Yeah.
>
> So why is this complaining, doesn't rcu_read_lock() disable
> preemption?
Ah, I guess it
On 05/09/2017 10:26 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 09:45 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>
>>> Is it from this_cpu_ptr() in blk_stat_add()?
>>
>> Yeah.
>
> So why is this complaining, doesn't rcu_read_lock() disable
> preemption?
Ah, I guess it
On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 09:45 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > > > > Is it from this_cpu_ptr() in blk_stat_add()?
> > > > >
> > > > > Yeah.
> > > >
> > > > So why is this complaining, doesn't rcu_read_lock() disable
> > > > preemption?
> > >
> > > Ah, I guess it doesn't if PREEMPT_RCU is set. How
On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 09:45 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > > > > Is it from this_cpu_ptr() in blk_stat_add()?
> > > > >
> > > > > Yeah.
> > > >
> > > > So why is this complaining, doesn't rcu_read_lock() disable
> > > > preemption?
> > >
> > > Ah, I guess it doesn't if PREEMPT_RCU is set. How
On 05/09/2017 09:40 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 09:15 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 05/09/2017 09:13 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 05/09/2017 09:04 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 08:53 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 05/09/2017 12:07 AM, Mike Galbraith
On 05/09/2017 09:40 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 09:15 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 05/09/2017 09:13 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 05/09/2017 09:04 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 08:53 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 05/09/2017 12:07 AM, Mike Galbraith
On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 09:15 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 05/09/2017 09:13 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On 05/09/2017 09:04 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 08:53 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > > On 05/09/2017 12:07 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > > > Hi Jens,
> > > > >
> > > >
On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 09:15 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 05/09/2017 09:13 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On 05/09/2017 09:04 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 08:53 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > > On 05/09/2017 12:07 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > > > Hi Jens,
> > > > >
> > > >
On 05/09/2017 09:13 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 05/09/2017 09:04 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>> On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 08:53 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 05/09/2017 12:07 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Hi Jens,
I was about to fix up this splat..
[ 445.022141] loop: module
On 05/09/2017 09:13 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 05/09/2017 09:04 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>> On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 08:53 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 05/09/2017 12:07 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Hi Jens,
I was about to fix up this splat..
[ 445.022141] loop: module
On 05/09/2017 09:04 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 08:53 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 05/09/2017 12:07 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>> Hi Jens,
>>>
>>> I was about to fix up this splat..
>>>
>>> [ 445.022141] loop: module loaded
>>> [ 445.078116] BUG: using smp_processor_id()
On 05/09/2017 09:04 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 08:53 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 05/09/2017 12:07 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>> Hi Jens,
>>>
>>> I was about to fix up this splat..
>>>
>>> [ 445.022141] loop: module loaded
>>> [ 445.078116] BUG: using smp_processor_id()
On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 08:53 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 05/09/2017 12:07 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > Hi Jens,
> >
> > I was about to fix up this splat..
> >
> > [ 445.022141] loop: module loaded
> > [ 445.078116] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible []
> > code: loop0/3801
On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 08:53 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 05/09/2017 12:07 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > Hi Jens,
> >
> > I was about to fix up this splat..
> >
> > [ 445.022141] loop: module loaded
> > [ 445.078116] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible []
> > code: loop0/3801
On 05/09/2017 12:07 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Hi Jens,
>
> I was about to fix up this splat..
>
> [ 445.022141] loop: module loaded
> [ 445.078116] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [] code:
> loop0/3801
> [ 445.085873] caller is debug_smp_processor_id+0x17/0x20
> [
On 05/09/2017 12:07 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Hi Jens,
>
> I was about to fix up this splat..
>
> [ 445.022141] loop: module loaded
> [ 445.078116] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [] code:
> loop0/3801
> [ 445.085873] caller is debug_smp_processor_id+0x17/0x20
> [
Hi Jens,
I was about to fix up this splat..
[ 445.022141] loop: module loaded
[ 445.078116] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [] code:
loop0/3801
[ 445.085873] caller is debug_smp_processor_id+0x17/0x20
[ 445.091016] CPU: 7 PID: 3801 Comm: loop0 Tainted: GE
Hi Jens,
I was about to fix up this splat..
[ 445.022141] loop: module loaded
[ 445.078116] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [] code:
loop0/3801
[ 445.085873] caller is debug_smp_processor_id+0x17/0x20
[ 445.091016] CPU: 7 PID: 3801 Comm: loop0 Tainted: GE
20 matches
Mail list logo
