Re: localed stuck in recent 3.18 git in copy_net_ns?

["Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 08:09:31PM +0300, Yanko Kaneti wrote:
> On Fri-10/24/14-2014 09:54, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 07:29:43PM +0300, Yanko Kaneti wrote:
> > > On Fri-10/24/14-2014 08:40, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 12:08:57PM +0300, Yanko Kaneti wrote:
> > > > > On Thu-10/23/14-2014 15:04, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 12:45:40AM +0300, Yanko Kaneti wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > On Thu, 2014-10-23 at 13:05 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 10:51:59PM +0300, Yanko Kaneti wrote:
> > 
> > [ . . . ]
> > 
> > > > > Ok, unless I've messsed up something major, bisecting points to:
> > > > > 
> > > > > 35ce7f29a44a rcu: Create rcuo kthreads only for onlined CPUs
> > > > > 
> > > > > Makes any sense ?
> > > > 
> > > > Good question.  ;-)
> > > > 
> > > > Are any of your online CPUs missing rcuo kthreads?  There should be
> > > > kthreads named rcuos/0, rcuos/1, rcuos/2, and so on for each online CPU.
> > > 
> > > Its a Phenom II X6. With 3.17 and linux-tip with 35ce7f29a44a reverted, the rcuos are 8
> > > and the modprobe ppp_generic testcase reliably works, libvirt also manages
> > > to setup its bridge.
> > > 
> > > Just with linux-tip , the rcuos are 6 but the failure is as reliable as
> > > before.
> 
> > Thank you, very interesting.  Which 6 of the rcuos are present?
> 
> Well, the rcuos are 0 to 5. Which sounds right for a 6 core CPU like this   
> Phenom II.

Ah, you get 8 without the patch because it creates them for potential
CPUs as well as real ones.  OK, got it.

> > > Awating instructions: :)
> > 
> > Well, I thought I understood the problem until you found that only 6 of
> > the expected 8 rcuos are present with linux-tip without the revert.  ;-)
> > 
> > I am putting together a patch for the part of the problem that I think
> > I understand, of course, but it would help a lot to know which two of
> > the rcuos are missing.  ;-)
> 
> Ready to test

Well, if you are feeling aggressive, give the following patch a spin.
I am doing sanity tests on it in the meantime.

							Thanx, Paul

------------------------------------------------------------------------

diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
index 29fb23f33c18..927c17b081c7 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
@@ -2546,9 +2546,13 @@ static void rcu_spawn_one_nocb_kthread(struct rcu_state *rsp, int cpu)
 			rdp->nocb_leader = rdp_spawn;
 			if (rdp_last && rdp != rdp_spawn)
 				rdp_last->nocb_next_follower = rdp;
-			rdp_last = rdp;
-			rdp = rdp->nocb_next_follower;
-			rdp_last->nocb_next_follower = NULL;
+			if (rdp == rdp_spawn) {
+				rdp = rdp->nocb_next_follower;
+			} else {
+				rdp_last = rdp;
+				rdp = rdp->nocb_next_follower;
+				rdp_last->nocb_next_follower = NULL;
+			}
 		} while (rdp);
 		rdp_spawn->nocb_next_follower = rdp_old_leader;
 	}