Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worke

To:	Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Thu, 12 Jul 2012 10:05:19 -0700
Cc:	linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, joshhunt00@xxxxxxxxx, axboe@xxxxxxxxx, rni@xxxxxxxxxx, vgoyal@xxxxxxxxxx, vwadekar@xxxxxxxxxx, herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-crypto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, swhiteho@xxxxxxxxxx, bpm@xxxxxxx, elder@xxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, marcel@xxxxxxxxxxxx, gustavo@xxxxxxxxxxx, johan.hedberg@xxxxxxxxx, linux-bluetooth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, martin.petersen@xxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Cp4Hn952LkAB8vLAE0ekt+mUuWpDlOcnqY4xVYKoMYw=; b=Y0kI4+yysuOunftLeYSCDRd3/cYKDwXXlNNWzuiSC/+5744NeWW4WVzovsLRInwqPQ TeosUPw4VpyHkQqVZVLwtmEC4k1bULz6YL291N3iWSHibhA6Ac2rUf0V7iaN2uEk7urf 8YyyrmuEemRmY/wOI9lk8cw/smmwOIm8pLU2QExGITZBArkwRMsi0U3tQRGi+6V/N3CT jkKAe/jvd8ilA5SxrKRGEmdbKOtXYPOHp3RDr8w5ahxANHG+QfaGb8ExARPMlxBhIF8X Sucl0zR4aGySz/mEE7SXVhbxHjh03zuJVn11aiCw4VceX+gryKKnIFxoQkyvE9WPPldL BBoA==
In-reply-to:	<20120712130648.GA19214@localhost>
References:	<1341859315-17759-7-git-send-email-tj@xxxxxxxxxx> <20120712130648.GA19214@localhost>
Sender:	Tejun Heo <htejun@xxxxxxxxx>
User-agent:	Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

Hello, Fengguang.

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 09:06:48PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> [    0.207977] WARNING: at /c/kernel-tests/mm/kernel/workqueue.c:1217 
> worker_enter_idle+0x2b8/0x32b()
> [    0.207977] Modules linked in:
> [    0.207977] Pid: 1, comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 3.5.0-rc6-08414-g9645fff 
> #15
> [    0.207977] Call Trace:
> [    0.207977]  [<ffffffff81087189>] ? worker_enter_idle+0x2b8/0x32b
> [    0.207977]  [<ffffffff810559d9>] warn_slowpath_common+0xae/0xdb
> [    0.207977]  [<ffffffff81055a2e>] warn_slowpath_null+0x28/0x31
> [    0.207977]  [<ffffffff81087189>] worker_enter_idle+0x2b8/0x32b
> [    0.207977]  [<ffffffff81087222>] start_worker+0x26/0x42
> [    0.207977]  [<ffffffff81c8b261>] init_workqueues+0x2d2/0x59a
> [    0.207977]  [<ffffffff81c8af8f>] ? usermodehelper_init+0x8a/0x8a
> [    0.207977]  [<ffffffff81000284>] do_one_initcall+0xce/0x272
> [    0.207977]  [<ffffffff81c6f650>] kernel_init+0x12e/0x3c1
> [    0.207977]  [<ffffffff814b9b74>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
> [    0.207977]  [<ffffffff814b80b0>] ? retint_restore_args+0x13/0x13
> [    0.207977]  [<ffffffff81c6f522>] ? start_kernel+0x737/0x737
> [    0.207977]  [<ffffffff814b9b70>] ? gs_change+0x13/0x13

Yeah, I forgot to flip the WARN_ON_ONCE() condition so that it checks
nr_running before looking at pool->nr_running.  The warning is
spurious.  Will post fix soon.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: [PATCH 3/6] workqueue: use @pool instead of @gcwq or @cpu where applicable, (continued) Re: [PATCH 3/6] workqueue: use @pool instead of @gcwq or @cpu where applicable, Tejun Heo [PATCH 5/6] workqueue: introduce NR_WORKER_POOLS and for_each_worker_pool(), Tejun Heo Re: [PATCH 5/6] workqueue: introduce NR_WORKER_POOLS and for_each_worker_pool(), Tejun Heo Re: [PATCH 5/6] workqueue: introduce NR_WORKER_POOLS and for_each_worker_pool(), Linus Torvalds Re: [PATCH 5/6] workqueue: introduce NR_WORKER_POOLS and for_each_worker_pool(), Tejun Heo Re: [PATCH 5/6] workqueue: introduce NR_WORKER_POOLS and for_each_worker_pool(), Linus Torvalds Re: [PATCH 5/6] workqueue: introduce NR_WORKER_POOLS and for_each_worker_pool(), Tejun Heo [PATCH UPDATED 5/6] workqueue: introduce NR_WORKER_POOLS and for_each_worker_pool(), Tejun Heo [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Tejun Heo Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Fengguang Wu Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Tejun Heo <= Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Tejun Heo Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Tony Luck Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Tejun Heo Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Tony Luck Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Tejun Heo Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Tony Luck Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Tony Luck Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Fengguang Wu Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Tejun Heo [PATCH UPDATED 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Tejun Heo

<Prev in Thread]

Current Thread

[Next in Thread>

Previous by Date:	Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Fengguang Wu
Next by Date:	Re: [PATCH 3/6] workqueue: use @pool instead of @gcwq or @cpu where applicable, Tejun Heo
Previous by Thread:	Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Fengguang Wu
Next by Thread:	Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Tejun Heo
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]

Previous by Date:

Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Fengguang Wu

Next by Date:

Re: [PATCH 3/6] workqueue: use @pool instead of @gcwq or @cpu where applicable, Tejun Heo

Previous by Thread:

Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Fengguang Wu

Next by Thread:

Re: [PATCH 6/6] workqueue: reimplement WQ_HIGHPRI using a separate worker_pool, Tejun Heo

Indexes:

[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]