From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steve Freitas Subject: Re: Regression, host crash with 4.5rc1 Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 21:29:12 -0800 Message-ID: <5476B6A8.4060706@ihonk.com> References: <5457F79B.2020300@ihonk.com> <20141104082012.GY12451@reaktio.net> <5458B55C0200007800044B33@mail.emea.novell.com> <5460716A.7090905@ihonk.com> <54608A8B0200007800045E58@mail.emea.novell.com> <54611A86.4000200@ihonk.com> <5461D15C02000078000464D7@mail.emea.novell.com> <546A4AD4.3030002@ihonk.com> <546B094C0200007800048A5C@mail.emea.novell.com> <546D429A.5020906@ihonk.com> <546DAD6502000078000492FD@mail.emea.novell.com> <546E4A17.5040902@ihonk.com> <546F091F0200007800049A1C@smtp.nue.novell.com> <54713848.3020401@ihonk.com> <5472FE31020000780004A2D5@mail.emea.novell.com> <7637FB2C-D2F9-4F5A-B71F-6C444C7F1B71@ihonk.com> <54732768020000780004A48C@mail.emea.novell.com> <5473AE78.5070505@ihonk.com> <547448D7020000780004A919@mail.emea.novell.com> <54744E29.8060703@ihonk.com> <54746F59020000780004A9E9@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <54746F59020000780004A9E9@mail.emea.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: Don Slutz , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 11/25/2014 03:00 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > Okay, so it's not really the mwait-idle driver causing the regression, > but it is C-state related. Hence we're now down to seeing whether all > or just the deeper C states are affected, i.e. I now need to ask you > to play with "max_cstate=". For that you'll have to remember that the > option's effect differs between the ACPI and the MWAIT idle drivers. > In the spirit of bisection I'd suggest using "max_cstate=2" first no > matter which of the two scenarios you pick. If that still hangs, > "max_cstate=1" obviously is the only other thing to try. Should that > not hang (and you left out "mwait-idle=0"), trying "max_cstate=3" > in that same scenario would be the other case to check. > > No need for 'd' and 'a' output for the time being, but 'c' output would > be much appreciated for all cases where you observe hangs. > Okay, working through that now. I tried max_cstate=2 and got no hangs, whether with or without mwait-idle=0. However, I was puzzled by this: (XEN) 'c' pressed -> printing ACPI Cx structures (XEN) ==cpu0== (XEN) active state: C0 (XEN) max_cstate: C2 (XEN) states: (XEN) C1: type[C1] latency[003] usage[12219860] method[ FFH] duration[1190961948551] (XEN) C2: type[C1] latency[010] usage[10205554] method[ FFH] duration[2015393965907] (XEN) C3: type[C2] latency[020] usage[50926286] method[ FFH] duration[30527997858148] (XEN) *C0: usage[73351700] duration[9974627547595] (XEN) max=0 pwr=0 urg=0 nxt=0 (XEN) PC2[0] PC3[8589642315848] PC6[0] PC7[0] (XEN) CC3[28794734145697] CC6[0] CC7[0] (XEN) ==cpu1== (XEN) active state: C3 (XEN) max_cstate: C2 (XEN) states: (XEN) C1: type[C1] latency[003] usage[10699950] method[ FFH] duration[1141422044112] (XEN) C2: type[C1] latency[010] usage[06382904] method[ FFH] duration[1329739264322] (XEN) *C3: type[C2] latency[020] usage[44630764] method[ FFH] duration[31676618425954] (XEN) C0: usage[61713618] duration[9561201640320] (XEN) max=0 pwr=0 urg=0 nxt=0 (XEN) PC2[0] PC3[8589642315848] PC6[0] PC7[0] (XEN) CC3[30066495105056] CC6[0] CC7[0] (XEN) ==cpu2== (XEN) active state: C3 (XEN) max_cstate: C2 (XEN) states: (XEN) C1: type[C1] latency[003] usage[10829791] method[ FFH] duration[1145244102917] (XEN) C2: type[C1] latency[010] usage[06392468] method[ FFH] duration[1330830147023] (XEN) *C3: type[C2] latency[020] usage[44705668] method[ FFH] duration[31741190985486] (XEN) C0: usage[61927927] duration[9491716216846] (XEN) max=0 pwr=0 urg=0 nxt=0 (XEN) PC2[0] PC3[8589642315848] PC6[0] PC7[0] (XEN) CC3[30117696095715] CC6[0] CC7[0] (XEN) ==cpu3== (XEN) active state: C3 (XEN) max_cstate: C2 (XEN) states: (XEN) C1: type[C1] latency[003] usage[10692336] method[ FFH] duration[1144876437514] (XEN) C2: type[C1] latency[010] usage[06394051] method[ FFH] duration[1333961503379] (XEN) *C3: type[C2] latency[020] usage[44744178] method[ FFH] duration[31803488799434] (XEN) C0: usage[61830565] duration[9426654792908] (XEN) max=0 pwr=0 urg=0 nxt=0 (XEN) PC2[0] PC3[8589642315848] PC6[0] PC7[0] (XEN) CC3[30191557548300] CC6[0] CC7[0] (XEN) ==cpu4== (XEN) active state: C3 (XEN) max_cstate: C2 (XEN) states: (XEN) C1: type[C1] latency[003] usage[10746634] method[ FFH] duration[1144044534459] (XEN) C2: type[C1] latency[010] usage[06444054] method[ FFH] duration[1340637424913] (XEN) *C3: type[C2] latency[020] usage[44690901] method[ FFH] duration[31663207165902] (XEN) C0: usage[61881589] duration[9561092487876] (XEN) max=0 pwr=0 urg=0 nxt=0 (XEN) PC2[0] PC3[8589642315848] PC6[0] PC7[0] (XEN) CC3[30049235012919] CC6[0] CC7[0] (XEN) ==cpu5== (XEN) active state: C3 (XEN) max_cstate: C2 (XEN) states: (XEN) C1: type[C1] latency[003] usage[10694684] method[ FFH] duration[1140625901110] (XEN) C2: type[C1] latency[010] usage[06461563] method[ FFH] duration[1342115502967] (XEN) *C3: type[C2] latency[020] usage[44834522] method[ FFH] duration[31719560664023] (XEN) C0: usage[61990769] duration[9506679619986] (XEN) max=0 pwr=0 urg=0 nxt=0 (XEN) PC2[0] PC3[8589642315848] PC6[0] PC7[0] Why would some of the cores be in C3 even though they list max_cstate as C2? Steve