Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 20:33:55 +0200 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> To: "Murty, Ravi" <ravi.murty@intel.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Bug in calcru in he 6.2 and 6.3 kernels Message-ID: <48726193.1080807@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <AEBCFC23C0E40949B10BA2C224FC61B007A3253D@orsmsx416.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <AEBCFC23C0E40949B10BA2C224FC61B007A3253D@orsmsx416.amr.corp.intel.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Murty, Ravi wrote: > Hello everyone, > > > > Finally found what my last problem was. We were running top in a loop > and running some workloads that called sched_bind() to bind threads to > specific CPUs. The problem was that (and I am using ULE) sched_bind > calls a function to notify another CPU of a thread and then mi_switches > out of it. Since mi_switch sets the "oncpu" field of the thread to NOCPU > and given the thread is still running, calcru would come in and assert > the fact that "If I am running I better no be on NOCPU".. It appears > that in other parts of the kernel (e.g. forward_signal) this is > acceptable (i.e. it is okay to be running and oncpu is NOCPU). > > > > Thanks > Ravi Don't use ULE in 6.x, it's broken and will not be fixed. Kris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?48726193.1080807>