From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id B692B3858C36; Mon,  8 May 2023 12:43:40 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org B692B3858C36
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org;
	s=default; t=1683549820;
	bh=TbQTTnmu0ylNLq+AnON66IbYVwYc3m5gQkPqvjbbmT4=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=GrPpv0RYPItOUVOMu9zjmAEdST8w50S1nMdkiCbW2btfEFVTgBorI1n8wXpu9myrm
	 d3SEib8da0DEQWp74b++s7tFq6dG6S+7/sXtBKGW3xQ1jlnRtxDVgGHCNM05llttlx
	 HnwC4L/ZnAVAYGR1EmsNQy6PabY6ILtZEH27im70=
From: "dsmith at redhat dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: systemtap@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug runtime/20735] "soft lockup" bug on RHEL7 ppc64
Date: Mon, 08 May 2023 12:43:40 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: systemtap
X-Bugzilla-Component: runtime
X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: dsmith at redhat dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: systemtap at sourceware dot org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-20735-6586-jEfl4dCfKs@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-20735-6586@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-20735-6586@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <systemtap.sourceware.org>

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D20735

--- Comment #5 from David Smith <dsmith at redhat dot com> ---
(In reply to agentzh from comment #4)
> David, seems like your patch causes CPU lockups with the 5.11 kernel and
> lock assertion failures on 6.1/6.2 kernels. See
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D30405
>=20
> I wonder why you wanted to turn off preemption for the stapkp_init() call=
 in
> your patch (commit 58c9bd156)?

Since this patch was committed almost 7 years ago, I really don't have any
memories of it other than what is written here in this bug (see comment #1).

Sorry I can't be of more help.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=