All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Toralf Förster" <toralf.foerster@gmx.de>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Cc: UML devel <user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	trinity@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [uml-devel] BUG: soft lockup for a user mode linux image
Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2013 21:16:08 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <524DC278.3020106@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <524DBFBB.1050002@nod.at>

On 10/03/2013 09:04 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 03.10.2013 20:54, schrieb Toralf Förster:
>> On 10/02/2013 09:55 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Toralf Förster <toralf.foerster@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>> Running trinity (1 process, no victim files, just "$>trinity -C1) for a longer time
>>>> within a 32 bit user mode linux image with a recent git kernel (host: 3.11.3 guest 3.12-rc3-g...)
>>>> yields into this konsole message :
>>>>
>>>>  * Starting local
>>>> net.core.warnings = 0                                                                         [ ok ]
>>>> BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 23s! [trinity-child0:2031]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> and at the host t1 of the "linux"-processes eats all CPU cycles at 1 CPU core.
>>>> 2 subsequent made back traces made with
>>>>
>>>> $> sudo gdb /home/tfoerste/devel/linux/linux 28144 -n -batch -ex bt
>>>>
>>>> shows nearly a similar position around __get_user_pages() - both are attached.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not surprised that trinity harms a systems - I'm just wondering whether this particular picture is
>>>> expected or if it points to an issue.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> FWIW the last lines of trinity log were :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [2031] [94] setsid() = 2031
>>>> [2031] [95] setresgid(rgid=0xffff33e3, egid=0xffffff93, sgid=0x22000040) = -1 (Operation not permitted)
>>>> [2031] [96] vmsplice(fd=5, iov=0x85501e0, nr_segs=300, flags=9) = 0x3000
>>>> [2031] [97] setresuid(ruid=0x80549193, euid=0xc61041e0, suid=0xff19b6fa) = -1 (Operation not permitted)
>>>> [2031] [98] setpriority(which=0xff010000, who=0xf3737373, niceval=0x8088960c) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [99] socketcall(call=1, args=0x8550200) = -1 (Address family not supported by protocol)
>>>> [2031] [100] access(filename="�", mode=2017) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [101] getgroups(gidsetsize=0, grouplist=0x80d0000[page_rand]) = 3
>>>> [2031] [102] msync(start=0xc0100220, len=0, flags=3) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [103] sigpending(set=0x40025000) = 0
>>>> [2031] [104] signalfd4(ufd=383, user_mask=1, sizemask=0xa4200000, flags=0x80800) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [105] sendfile(out_fd=383, in_fd=382, offset=0, count=4096) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [106] fanotify_mark(fanotify_fd=382, flags=5, mask=0x8000023, dfd=382, pathname="/proc/1092/task/1092/fdinfo/68") = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [107] wait4(upid=1, stat_addr=4, options=0xd761979b, ru=8) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [108] sigpending(set=0x80ca000[page_zeros]) = 0
>>>> [2031] [109] setresuid(ruid=0xefffd6fc, euid=0x1bf4c92f, suid=0xffff2e33) = -1 (Operation not permitted)
>>>> [2031] [110] munlock(addr=0x40025000, len=34) = 0
>>>> [2031] [111] timer_delete(timer_id=0xffffffdc) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [112] sched_get_priority_max(policy=0x10000040) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [113] syslog(type=0xc1000000, buf=1, len=0x82a5) = -1 (Operation not permitted)
>>>> [2031] [114] setpriority(which=0xc4c806c6, who=0xffffff01, niceval=0xffff0682) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [115] getgroups16(gidsetsize=0xfffe, grouplist=1) = -1 (Bad address)
>>>> [2031] [116] rename(oldname=4, newname=8) = -1 (Bad address)
>>>> [2031] [117] inotify_init() = 654
>>>> [2031] [118] getgid() = 100
>>>> [2031] [119] fstatat64(dfd=382, filename="/sys/devices/virtual/net/sit0/duplex", statbuf=0, flag=0xb545d727) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [120] unlinkat(dfd=382, pathname="/proc/sys/net/ipv4/neigh/default/retrans_time", flag=0xc00ef76) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [121] timerfd_create(clockid=0, flags=0) = 655
>>>> [2031] [122] munlock(addr=4, len=0x3fff) = -1 (Cannot allocate memory)
>>>> [2031] [123] fremovexattr(fd=382, name=0) = -1 (Bad address)
>>>> [2031] [124] sched_get_priority_min(policy=0xff58bfef) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [125] mq_timedreceive(mqdes=397, u_msg_ptr=4, msg_len=5245, u_msg_prio=0xc0100220, u_abs_timeout=0xc0100220) = -1 (Bad address)
>>>> [2031] [126] chdir(filename="/proc/116/net/ptype") = -1 (Not a directory)
>>>> [2031] [127] ssetmask(newmask=0x88000092) = 0
>>>> [2031] [128] statfs(pathname="/proc/6/mounts", buf=0) = -1 (Bad address)
>>>> [2031] [129] fchown16(fd=397, user=104, group=0x94100000) = -1 (Operation not permitted)
>>>> [2031] [130] fchdir(fd=397) = -1 (Not a directory)
>>>> [2031] [131] mkdir(pathname="/proc/1092/task/1092/fdinfo/316", mode=525) = -1 (File exists)
>>>> [2031] [132] fsetxattr(fd=386, name=0x856f158, value=0x8571160, size=0, flags=0) = -1 (Numerical result out of range)
>>>> [2031] [133] io_setup(nr_events=4095, ctxp=0x40266000) ^CKilled by signal 2.
>>>
>>> Reading your gdb backtraces show that schedule_timeout() got called
>>> with a negative value.
>>> Looks like an integer overflow.
>>> The soft-lockup might also origin from that (very big integer which
>>> did not overflow jet)
>>>
>>
>> If the culprit is solved by this patch I'd like to send it out. But I'm
>> unsure whether it catches the culprit or if it just covers the root cause.
> 
> I fear your Patch will not fix the issue.
> 
> Does the issue only trigger on 32bit UMLs?
No diea, I do only have a 32 bit system here (both host and client).

> How long does it take till trinity hits it?
a command like

$> ssh tfoerste@trinity "rm -rf t3; mkdir t3; cd t3; trinity -C4"

usually needs 10 till 15 min to trigger the issue. With just 1 trinity
task (-C1) however it needs often a hour or more.

> Thanks,
> //richard
> 


-- 
MfG/Sincerely
Toralf Förster
pgp finger print: 7B1A 07F4 EC82 0F90 D4C2 8936 872A E508 7DB6 9DA3

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
October Webinars: Code for Performance
Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance.
Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from 
the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register >
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60134791&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Toralf Förster" <toralf.foerster@gmx.de>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@gmail.com>,
	trinity@vger.kernel.org,
	UML devel <user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [uml-devel] BUG: soft lockup for a user mode linux image
Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2013 21:16:08 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <524DC278.3020106@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <524DBFBB.1050002@nod.at>

On 10/03/2013 09:04 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 03.10.2013 20:54, schrieb Toralf Förster:
>> On 10/02/2013 09:55 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Toralf Förster <toralf.foerster@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>> Running trinity (1 process, no victim files, just "$>trinity -C1) for a longer time
>>>> within a 32 bit user mode linux image with a recent git kernel (host: 3.11.3 guest 3.12-rc3-g...)
>>>> yields into this konsole message :
>>>>
>>>>  * Starting local
>>>> net.core.warnings = 0                                                                         [ ok ]
>>>> BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 23s! [trinity-child0:2031]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> and at the host t1 of the "linux"-processes eats all CPU cycles at 1 CPU core.
>>>> 2 subsequent made back traces made with
>>>>
>>>> $> sudo gdb /home/tfoerste/devel/linux/linux 28144 -n -batch -ex bt
>>>>
>>>> shows nearly a similar position around __get_user_pages() - both are attached.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not surprised that trinity harms a systems - I'm just wondering whether this particular picture is
>>>> expected or if it points to an issue.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> FWIW the last lines of trinity log were :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [2031] [94] setsid() = 2031
>>>> [2031] [95] setresgid(rgid=0xffff33e3, egid=0xffffff93, sgid=0x22000040) = -1 (Operation not permitted)
>>>> [2031] [96] vmsplice(fd=5, iov=0x85501e0, nr_segs=300, flags=9) = 0x3000
>>>> [2031] [97] setresuid(ruid=0x80549193, euid=0xc61041e0, suid=0xff19b6fa) = -1 (Operation not permitted)
>>>> [2031] [98] setpriority(which=0xff010000, who=0xf3737373, niceval=0x8088960c) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [99] socketcall(call=1, args=0x8550200) = -1 (Address family not supported by protocol)
>>>> [2031] [100] access(filename="�", mode=2017) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [101] getgroups(gidsetsize=0, grouplist=0x80d0000[page_rand]) = 3
>>>> [2031] [102] msync(start=0xc0100220, len=0, flags=3) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [103] sigpending(set=0x40025000) = 0
>>>> [2031] [104] signalfd4(ufd=383, user_mask=1, sizemask=0xa4200000, flags=0x80800) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [105] sendfile(out_fd=383, in_fd=382, offset=0, count=4096) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [106] fanotify_mark(fanotify_fd=382, flags=5, mask=0x8000023, dfd=382, pathname="/proc/1092/task/1092/fdinfo/68") = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [107] wait4(upid=1, stat_addr=4, options=0xd761979b, ru=8) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [108] sigpending(set=0x80ca000[page_zeros]) = 0
>>>> [2031] [109] setresuid(ruid=0xefffd6fc, euid=0x1bf4c92f, suid=0xffff2e33) = -1 (Operation not permitted)
>>>> [2031] [110] munlock(addr=0x40025000, len=34) = 0
>>>> [2031] [111] timer_delete(timer_id=0xffffffdc) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [112] sched_get_priority_max(policy=0x10000040) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [113] syslog(type=0xc1000000, buf=1, len=0x82a5) = -1 (Operation not permitted)
>>>> [2031] [114] setpriority(which=0xc4c806c6, who=0xffffff01, niceval=0xffff0682) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [115] getgroups16(gidsetsize=0xfffe, grouplist=1) = -1 (Bad address)
>>>> [2031] [116] rename(oldname=4, newname=8) = -1 (Bad address)
>>>> [2031] [117] inotify_init() = 654
>>>> [2031] [118] getgid() = 100
>>>> [2031] [119] fstatat64(dfd=382, filename="/sys/devices/virtual/net/sit0/duplex", statbuf=0, flag=0xb545d727) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [120] unlinkat(dfd=382, pathname="/proc/sys/net/ipv4/neigh/default/retrans_time", flag=0xc00ef76) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [121] timerfd_create(clockid=0, flags=0) = 655
>>>> [2031] [122] munlock(addr=4, len=0x3fff) = -1 (Cannot allocate memory)
>>>> [2031] [123] fremovexattr(fd=382, name=0) = -1 (Bad address)
>>>> [2031] [124] sched_get_priority_min(policy=0xff58bfef) = -1 (Invalid argument)
>>>> [2031] [125] mq_timedreceive(mqdes=397, u_msg_ptr=4, msg_len=5245, u_msg_prio=0xc0100220, u_abs_timeout=0xc0100220) = -1 (Bad address)
>>>> [2031] [126] chdir(filename="/proc/116/net/ptype") = -1 (Not a directory)
>>>> [2031] [127] ssetmask(newmask=0x88000092) = 0
>>>> [2031] [128] statfs(pathname="/proc/6/mounts", buf=0) = -1 (Bad address)
>>>> [2031] [129] fchown16(fd=397, user=104, group=0x94100000) = -1 (Operation not permitted)
>>>> [2031] [130] fchdir(fd=397) = -1 (Not a directory)
>>>> [2031] [131] mkdir(pathname="/proc/1092/task/1092/fdinfo/316", mode=525) = -1 (File exists)
>>>> [2031] [132] fsetxattr(fd=386, name=0x856f158, value=0x8571160, size=0, flags=0) = -1 (Numerical result out of range)
>>>> [2031] [133] io_setup(nr_events=4095, ctxp=0x40266000) ^CKilled by signal 2.
>>>
>>> Reading your gdb backtraces show that schedule_timeout() got called
>>> with a negative value.
>>> Looks like an integer overflow.
>>> The soft-lockup might also origin from that (very big integer which
>>> did not overflow jet)
>>>
>>
>> If the culprit is solved by this patch I'd like to send it out. But I'm
>> unsure whether it catches the culprit or if it just covers the root cause.
> 
> I fear your Patch will not fix the issue.
> 
> Does the issue only trigger on 32bit UMLs?
No diea, I do only have a 32 bit system here (both host and client).

> How long does it take till trinity hits it?
a command like

$> ssh tfoerste@trinity "rm -rf t3; mkdir t3; cd t3; trinity -C4"

usually needs 10 till 15 min to trigger the issue. With just 1 trinity
task (-C1) however it needs often a hour or more.

> Thanks,
> //richard
> 


-- 
MfG/Sincerely
Toralf Förster
pgp finger print: 7B1A 07F4 EC82 0F90 D4C2 8936 872A E508 7DB6 9DA3

  reply	other threads:[~2013-10-03 19:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-10-02 18:30 [uml-devel] BUG: soft lockup for a user mode linux image Toralf Förster
2013-10-02 18:30 ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-02 18:31 ` [uml-devel] " Toralf Förster
2013-10-02 18:31   ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-02 19:55 ` [uml-devel] " Richard Weinberger
2013-10-02 19:55   ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-03 18:54   ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-03 18:54     ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-03 19:04     ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-03 19:04       ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-03 19:16       ` Toralf Förster [this message]
2013-10-03 19:16         ` [uml-devel] " Toralf Förster
2013-10-03 19:20         ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-03 19:20           ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-03 19:33           ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-03 19:33             ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-04  5:52             ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-04  5:52               ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-06 14:17               ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-06 14:17                 ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-06 18:38                 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-10-06 18:38                   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-10-06 20:08                   ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-06 20:26                     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-10-06 21:01                       ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-08 20:07                         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-10-08 20:07                           ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-10-09 17:26                           ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-09 18:43                             ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-09 18:43                               ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-09 21:47                               ` Jan Kara
2013-10-09 21:47                                 ` Jan Kara
2013-10-09 22:33                                 ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-09 22:33                                   ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-09 22:33                                   ` Richard Weinberger
2013-10-10 16:49                                   ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-10 16:49                                     ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-10 16:49                                     ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-11  1:16                                     ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-11  1:16                                       ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-11  8:42                                       ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-11  8:42                                         ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-11  8:57                                         ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-11  8:57                                           ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-11  8:57                                           ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-11  9:05                                           ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-11  9:05                                             ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-11 14:12                                           ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-11 14:12                                             ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-11 14:12                                             ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-12  0:43                                             ` [PATCH] writeback: fix negative bdi max pause Fengguang Wu
2013-10-12  0:43                                               ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-12  4:45                                             ` [PATCH v2] " Fengguang Wu
2013-10-12  4:45                                               ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-14 12:34                                               ` Jan Kara
2013-10-14 12:34                                                 ` Jan Kara
2013-10-10  2:46                                 ` [uml-devel] BUG: soft lockup for a user mode linux image Fengguang Wu
2013-10-10  2:46                                   ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-10  6:52                                   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-10-10  6:52                                     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-10-10  7:03                                     ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-10  7:03                                       ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-08 19:56                       ` Toralf Förster
2013-10-09 10:35                         ` stian

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=524DC278.3020106@gmx.de \
    --to=toralf.foerster@gmx.de \
    --cc=richard@nod.at \
    --cc=trinity@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /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.