Re: [patch] sched: fix macro -> inline function conversion bug

[Peter Williams]

Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Jul 2006 07:25:39 +0200
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > * Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, 02 Jul 2006 16:27:55 -0700
> > > "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Panic on NUMA-Q (mm4 was fine). Presumably some new scheduler patch
> > > >
> > > > divide error: 0000 [#1]
> > > > 8K_STACKS SMP 
> > > > last sysfs file: 
> > > > Modules linked in:
> > > > CPU:    1
> > > > EIP:    0060:[<c0112b6e>]    Not tainted VLI
> > > > EFLAGS: 00010046   (2.6.17-mm5-autokern1 #1) 
> > > > EIP is at find_busiest_group+0x1a3/0x47c
> > > > eax: 00000000   ebx: 00000007   ecx: 00000000   edx: 00000000
> > > > esi: 00000000   edi: e75ff264   ebp: e7405ec8   esp: e7405e58
> > > > ds: 007b   es: 007b   ss: 0068
> > > > Process swapper (pid: 0, ti=e7404000 task=c13f8560 task.ti=e7404000)
> > > > Stack: e75ff264 00000010 c0119020 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 
> > > >        ffffffff 00000000 00000000 00000001 00000001 00000001 00000080 00000000 
> > > >        00000000 00000200 00000020 00000080 00000000 00000000 e75ff260 c1364960 
> > > > Call Trace:
> > > >  [<c0119020>] vprintk+0x5f/0x213
> > > >  [<c0112efb>] load_balance+0x54/0x1d6
> > > >  [<c011332d>] rebalance_tick+0xc5/0xe3
> > > >  [<c01137a3>] scheduler_tick+0x2cb/0x2d3
> > > >  [<c01215b4>] update_process_times+0x51/0x5d
> > > >  [<c010c224>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x5a/0x61
> > > >  [<c0102d5b>] apic_timer_interrupt+0x1f/0x24
> > > >  [<c01006c0>] default_idle+0x0/0x59
> > > >  [<c01006f1>] default_idle+0x31/0x59
> > > >  [<c0100791>] cpu_idle+0x64/0x79
> > > > Code: 00 5b 83 f8 1f 89 c6 5f 0f 8e 63 ff ff ff 8b 45 e0 8b 55 e8 01 45 dc 8b 4a 08 89 c2 01 4d d4 c1 e2 07 89 d0 31 d2 89 ce c1 ee 07 <f7> f1 83 7d 9c 00 89 45 e0 74 17 89 45 d8 8b 55 e8 8b 4d a4 8b 
> > > > EIP: [<c0112b6e>] find_busiest_group+0x1a3/0x47c SS:ESP 0068:e7405e58
> > > Yes, Andy's reporting that too.  I asked him to identify the 
> > > file-n-line and he ran away on me.
> > i checked the scheduler queue and nothing jumped out at me, except the 
> > cleanup bug fixed by the patch below. (which should be harmless in this 
> > particular case - nr_running should never be smaller than 0 or larger 
> > than ~4 billion. A fix is warranted nevertheless.)
>
> Did you work out which divide is getting the div-by-zero?  I started at it
> a bit and wasn't sure - am getting wildly different code generation over
> here.

As far as I can see all divides, except those that rely on 
group->cpu_power being non zero, in find_busiest_queue() are protected 
against divide by zero.  So this would suggest that initialization of 
the scheduler group data would be the place to look.

Peter
--
Peter Williams                                   pwil3058@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious."
 -- Ambrose Bierce
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/