From: David Wysochanski <dwysocha@redhat.com>
To: "Mkrtchyan, Tigran" <tigran.mkrtchyan@desy.de>,
linux-nfs <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: question on kernel stack trace
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 14:44:10 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1519242250.3719.9.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1894283666.7881272.1519209992729.JavaMail.zimbra@desy.de>
On Wed, 2018-02-21 at 11:46 +0100, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
> On one of our nodes we got the following stack trace:
>
>
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: updatedb D 000000000000000f 0
> 32087 32081 0x00000080
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: ffff880852d13a88 0000000000000082
> 0000000000000000 ffffffffa00bfe13
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: 0000000000000050 0000000300000001
> 000d5a7576495a7a 0000000000000286
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: 0000000000000286 00000001dfd51213
> ffff8810207c5068 ffff880852d13fd8
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: Call Trace:
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffffa00bfe13>] ?
> ext4_mark_inode_dirty+0x83/0x1d0 [ext4]
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffffa029b1e4>] ?
> __rpc_sleep_on_priority+0xf4/0x330 [sunrpc]
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffffa029a5b0>] ?
> rpc_wait_bit_killable+0x0/0xa0 [sunrpc]
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffffa029a5f2>]
> rpc_wait_bit_killable+0x42/0xa0 [sunrpc]
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff8154ca7f>]
> __wait_on_bit+0x5f/0x90
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffffa0294217>] ?
> xprt_reserve_xprt+0x87/0x110 [sunrpc]
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffffa029a5b0>] ?
> rpc_wait_bit_killable+0x0/0xa0 [sunrpc]
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff8154cb28>]
> out_of_line_wait_on_bit+0x78/0x90
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff810a7220>] ?
> wake_bit_function+0x0/0x50
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffffa029ab35>]
> __rpc_execute+0xf5/0x350 [sunrpc]
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff810a7027>] ?
> bit_waitqueue+0x17/0xd0
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffffa029adf1>]
> rpc_execute+0x61/0xa0 [sunrpc]
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffffa0291475>]
> rpc_run_task+0x75/0x90 [sunrpc]
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffffa0291592>]
> rpc_call_sync+0x42/0x70 [sunrpc]
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffffa035cf2e>]
> _nfs4_call_sync+0x3e/0x40 [nfs]
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffffa035574c>]
> _nfs4_proc_getattr+0xac/0xc0 [nfs]
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffffa0358796>]
> nfs4_proc_getattr+0x56/0x80 [nfs]
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffffa033e293>]
> __nfs_revalidate_inode+0xe3/0x220 [nfs]
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffffa033f12e>]
> nfs_getattr+0xde/0x210 [nfs]
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff811a0391>]
> vfs_getattr+0x51/0x80
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff811a01d4>] ?
> cp_new_stat+0xe4/0x100
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff811a0424>]
> vfs_fstatat+0x64/0xa0
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff811a04ce>]
> vfs_lstat+0x1e/0x20
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff811a04f4>]
> sys_newlstat+0x24/0x50
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff81556627>] ?
> system_call_after_swapgs+0x187/0x220
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff81556620>] ?
> system_call_after_swapgs+0x180/0x220
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff810eeef7>] ?
> audit_syscall_entry+0x1d7/0x200
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff8155660b>] ?
> system_call_after_swapgs+0x16b/0x220
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff81556604>] ?
> system_call_after_swapgs+0x164/0x220
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff815565fd>] ?
> system_call_after_swapgs+0x15d/0x220
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff815565f6>] ?
> system_call_after_swapgs+0x156/0x220
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff815565ef>] ?
> system_call_after_swapgs+0x14f/0x220
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff815566d6>]
> system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
> Feb 19 16:55:53 nafhh kernel: [<ffffffff8155656a>] ?
> system_call_after_swapgs+0xca/0x220
>
>
> I am surprised, that top of the stack trace is in ext4 module. Can
> some one put a light on it?
>
Ignore the symbols with '?' next to them as they are not reliable.
If you want to map this to code use something like 'eu-addr2line' and
see if the symbols make sense in terms of source code lines.
This looks like the process is just blocked for a long time waiting on
an NFS4 GETATTR to complete, and does not look unusual to me.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-21 19:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-21 10:46 question on kernel stack trace Mkrtchyan, Tigran
2018-02-21 19:44 ` David Wysochanski [this message]
2018-02-21 21:10 ` Mkrtchyan, Tigran
2018-02-21 21:33 ` David Wysochanski
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=1519242250.3719.9.camel@redhat.com \
--to=dwysocha@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tigran.mkrtchyan@desy.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.