scheduling while atomic: swapper/0/0x10000002

Christian Hoffmann

unread,

Sep 10, 2011, 10:00:01 AM9/10/11

to

Hi,

I can see the following bug report in the kernel 3.1 rc5 dmesg:

[ 0.000008] BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/0/0x10000002
[ 0.000012] Modules linked in:
[ 0.000015] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 3.1.0-rc5-ch+ #2
[ 0.000017] Call Trace:
[ 0.000024] [<ffffffff81052cb6>] __schedule_bug+0x66/0x70
[ 0.000028] [<ffffffff8160329d>] schedule+0x99d/0x9b0
[ 0.000032] [<ffffffff81cf22b5>] ? pidmap_init+0x9f/0xdf
[ 0.000035] [<ffffffff8105cc7a>] __cond_resched+0x2a/0x40
[ 0.000038] [<ffffffff81603541>] _cond_resched+0x31/0x40
[ 0.000041] [<ffffffff8115fb63>] kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x53/0x160
[ 0.000043] [<ffffffff81cf22b5>] pidmap_init+0x9f/0xdf
[ 0.000046] [<ffffffff81cd9b8a>] start_kernel+0x333/0x3c8
[ 0.000049] [<ffffffff81cd9347>] x86_64_start_reservations+0x132/0x136
[ 0.000051] [<ffffffff81cd944c>] x86_64_start_kernel+0x101/0x110

Full dmesg output:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/21820416/dmsg.log

Can I provide additional input?

Kind regards,
Chris
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majo...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Josh Boyer

unread,

Sep 10, 2011, 12:50:02 PM9/10/11

to

On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Christian Hoffmann
<em...@christianhoffmann.info> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I can see the following bug report in the kernel 3.1 rc5 dmesg:
>
> [ 0.000008] BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/0/0x10000002
> [ 0.000012] Modules linked in:
> [ 0.000015] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 3.1.0-rc5-ch+ #2
> [ 0.000017] Call Trace:
> [ 0.000024] [<ffffffff81052cb6>] __schedule_bug+0x66/0x70
> [ 0.000028] [<ffffffff8160329d>] schedule+0x99d/0x9b0
> [ 0.000032] [<ffffffff81cf22b5>] ? pidmap_init+0x9f/0xdf
> [ 0.000035] [<ffffffff8105cc7a>] __cond_resched+0x2a/0x40
> [ 0.000038] [<ffffffff81603541>] _cond_resched+0x31/0x40
> [ 0.000041] [<ffffffff8115fb63>] kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x53/0x160
> [ 0.000043] [<ffffffff81cf22b5>] pidmap_init+0x9f/0xdf
> [ 0.000046] [<ffffffff81cd9b8a>] start_kernel+0x333/0x3c8
> [ 0.000049] [<ffffffff81cd9347>] x86_64_start_reservations+0x132/0x136
> [ 0.000051] [<ffffffff81cd944c>] x86_64_start_kernel+0x101/0x110

Paul McKenney has a patch that solves this oops. You can find it here:

http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=131537669921538&w=2

We had discussed getting this into 3.1, but apparently that didn't
happen (yet?). I thought it had been sent upstream with my tested-by,
but I don't see it included in Linus' tree.

josh

Christian Hoffmann

unread,

Sep 10, 2011, 1:20:02 PM9/10/11

to

On 09/10/2011 06:44 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Christian Hoffmann
> <em...@christianhoffmann.info> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I can see the following bug report in the kernel 3.1 rc5 dmesg:
>>
>> [ 0.000008] BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/0/0x10000002
>> [ 0.000012] Modules linked in:
>> [ 0.000015] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 3.1.0-rc5-ch+ #2
>> [ 0.000017] Call Trace:
>> [ 0.000024] [<ffffffff81052cb6>] __schedule_bug+0x66/0x70
>> [ 0.000028] [<ffffffff8160329d>] schedule+0x99d/0x9b0
>> [ 0.000032] [<ffffffff81cf22b5>] ? pidmap_init+0x9f/0xdf
>> [ 0.000035] [<ffffffff8105cc7a>] __cond_resched+0x2a/0x40
>> [ 0.000038] [<ffffffff81603541>] _cond_resched+0x31/0x40
>> [ 0.000041] [<ffffffff8115fb63>] kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x53/0x160
>> [ 0.000043] [<ffffffff81cf22b5>] pidmap_init+0x9f/0xdf
>> [ 0.000046] [<ffffffff81cd9b8a>] start_kernel+0x333/0x3c8
>> [ 0.000049] [<ffffffff81cd9347>] x86_64_start_reservations+0x132/0x136
>> [ 0.000051] [<ffffffff81cd944c>] x86_64_start_kernel+0x101/0x110
>
> Paul McKenney has a patch that solves this oops. You can find it here:
>
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=131537669921538&w=2
>
> We had discussed getting this into 3.1, but apparently that didn't
> happen (yet?). I thought it had been sent upstream with my tested-by,
> but I don't see it included in Linus' tree.

Hi,

the patch up there doesn't seem to apply cleanly to 3.1 rc5, as it
misses the rename done in "[PATCH tip/core/rcu 23/55] rcu: Simplify
quiescent-state accounting"
(http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=131537654621392&w=2).

Kind regards,
Chris

Paul E. McKenney

unread,

Sep 10, 2011, 4:00:02 PM9/10/11

to

For 3.1-rc5, you will be wanting this one:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/8/19/355

Thanx, Paul

Christian Hoffmann

unread,

Sep 12, 2011, 12:50:02 PM9/12/11

to

Hi,

yes, this applies and makes the stack disappear.

Thanks,
Chris

Paul E. McKenney

unread,

Sep 12, 2011, 1:30:03 PM9/12/11

to

Very good! I have added your Tested-by, along with Josh Boyer's.

Thanx, Paul