diff --git a/kernel/lockdep.c b/kernel/lockdep.c
index b2e08c932d91..f45c6817770e 100644
--- a/kernel/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/lockdep.c
@@ -4170,6 +4170,28 @@ void lockdep_rcu_suspicious(const char *file, const int line, const char *s)
 	printk("%s:%d %s!\n", file, line, s);
 	printk("\nother info that might help us debug this:\n\n");
 	printk("\nrcu_scheduler_active = %d, debug_locks = %d\n", rcu_scheduler_active, debug_locks);
+
+	/*
+	 * If a CPU is in the RCU-free window in idle (ie: in the section
+	 * between rcu_idle_enter() and rcu_idle_exit(), then RCU
+	 * considers that CPU to be in an "extended quiescent state",
+	 * which means that RCU will be completely ignoring that CPU.
+	 * Therefore, rcu_read_lock() and friends have absolutely no
+	 * effect on a CPU running in that state. In other words, even if
+	 * such an RCU-idle CPU has called rcu_read_lock(), RCU might well
+	 * delete data structures out from under it.  RCU really has no
+	 * choice here: we need to keep an RCU-free window in idle where
+	 * the CPU may possibly enter into low power mode. This way we can
+	 * notice an extended quiescent state to other CPUs that started a grace
+	 * period. Otherwise we would delay any grace period as long as we run
+	 * in the idle task.
+	 *
+	 * So complain bitterly if someone does call rcu_read_lock(),
+	 * rcu_read_lock_bh() and so on from extended quiescent states.
+	 */
+	if (rcu_is_cpu_idle())
+		printk("RCU used illegally from extended quiescent state!\n");
+
 	lockdep_print_held_locks(curr);
 	printk("\nstack backtrace:\n");
 	dump_stack();