All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Lukasz Dorau <lukasz.dorau@intel.com>,
	James Bottomley <JBottomley@parallels.com>,
	Andrzej Jakowski <andrzej.jakowski@intel.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] kick ksoftirqd more often to please soft lockup detector
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 10:48:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1330422535.11248.78.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120227203847.22153.62468.stgit@dwillia2-linux.jf.intel.com>

On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 12:38 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> An experimental hack to tease out whether we are continuing to
> run the softirq handler past the point of needing scheduling.
> 
> It allows only one trip through __do_softirq() as long as need_resched()
> is set which hopefully creates the back pressure needed to get ksoftirqd
> scheduled.
> 
> Targeted to address reports like the following that are produced
> with i/o tests to a sas domain with a large number of disks (48+), and
> lots of debugging enabled (slub_deubg, lockdep) that makes the
> block+scsi softirq path more cpu-expensive than normal.
> 
> With this patch applied the softlockup detector seems appeased, but it
> seems odd to need changes to kernel/softirq.c so maybe I have overlooked
> something that needs changing at the block/scsi level?
> 
> BUG: soft lockup - CPU#3 stuck for 22s! [kworker/3:1:78] 

So you're stuck in softirq for 22s+, max_restart is 10, this gives that
on average you spend 2.2s+ per softirq invocation, this is completely
absolutely bonkers. Softirq handlers should never consume significant
amount of cpu-time.

Thomas, think its about time we put something like the below in?


---
 kernel/softirq.c |   16 ++++++++++++++++
 1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/softirq.c b/kernel/softirq.c
index ff066a4..6137ee1 100644
--- a/kernel/softirq.c
+++ b/kernel/softirq.c
@@ -210,6 +210,7 @@ asmlinkage void __do_softirq(void)
 	__u32 pending;
 	int max_restart = MAX_SOFTIRQ_RESTART;
 	int cpu;
+	u64 start, callback, now;
 
 	pending = local_softirq_pending();
 	account_system_vtime(current);
@@ -223,6 +224,8 @@ asmlinkage void __do_softirq(void)
 	/* Reset the pending bitmask before enabling irqs */
 	set_softirq_pending(0);
 
+	start = callback = cpu_clock(cpu);
+
 	local_irq_enable();
 
 	h = softirq_vec;
@@ -246,6 +249,15 @@ asmlinkage void __do_softirq(void)
 				preempt_count() = prev_count;
 			}
 
+			now = cpu_clock(cpu);
+			if (now - callback > TICK_NSEC / 4) {
+				printk(KERN_ERR "softirq took longer than 1/4 tick: "
+						"%u %s %p\n", vec_nr, 
+						softirq_to_name[vec_nr],
+						h->action);
+			}
+			callback = now;
+
 			rcu_bh_qs(cpu);
 		}
 		h++;
@@ -254,6 +266,10 @@ asmlinkage void __do_softirq(void)
 
 	local_irq_disable();
 
+	now = cpu_clock(cpu);
+	if (now - start > TICK_NSEC / 2)
+		printk(KERN_ERR "softirq loop took longer than 1/2 tick\n");
+
 	pending = local_softirq_pending();
 	if (pending && --max_restart)
 		goto restart;

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-02-28  9:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-02-27 20:38 [RFC PATCH] kick ksoftirqd more often to please soft lockup detector Dan Williams
2012-02-28  8:35 ` Yong Zhang
2012-02-28  9:48 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2012-02-28 16:48   ` Dan Williams
2012-02-28 21:41   ` Thomas Gleixner
2012-02-28 22:16     ` Dan Williams
2012-02-28 22:25       ` Dan Williams
2012-02-28 22:25         ` Dan Williams
2012-02-29  9:17       ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-02-29 19:49         ` Dan Williams
2012-02-29 19:49           ` Dan Williams
2012-03-03  8:39         ` Paul E. McKenney

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1330422535.11248.78.camel@twins \
    --to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=JBottomley@parallels.com \
    --cc=andrzej.jakowski@intel.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lukasz.dorau@intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.