From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEA921E5B85 for ; Wed, 26 Feb 2025 09:17:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740561477; cv=none; b=ru0f+pRJsnfv1H8IMnVXtHv7oWrIFJxMoL6dch+JQKhKYq9gExwJWDM6lShpgL9JiDgsKGK1tHSbto1AcZENwzCOlkPIrY/FNy+ATrRUzgA5jlg8S096UWwZglNUW6sxyMFLQGSkA2+ATpgtKLcDRv+5I7sjChIMtoBEVWJffds= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740561477; c=relaxed/simple; bh=tIkWIH4H63EtuTXaIv2rojv2Rpm6ygDSr92qVs6DP5U=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=JvDNrOYTaIUiLmFvk6IjDdbj3Xhqg4lhF2S2hHaxcvOkyMkbqgMg964J8nyj/xXX/XePgFYY7u1Lkqk//ZZeqLRWilyFUDMuiJgz36Q6FGzIg64wyfUXQ7gZ1REs5didd5UGhg06BjSp0bI+AMRfQjbheaB6qGE3Rdj3XaB6xL8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=MLfl9Jhv; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=ZVIqUMyy; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="MLfl9Jhv"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="ZVIqUMyy" Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2025 10:17:52 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1740561474; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=oAY7s3Py2zdV0fIbBnU8iAwnMWt29rUYTaq4TKJ83mE=; b=MLfl9JhvVWLtrwPeiQd57pRIHeCpTLGFY9jQ3yiNpwgl3Dld0MkGZ6TKFaLqBWNZIc2V9I uqWjLfHrCmnS/GqlfKtWK67/358Ce2m0FxeNRXZ44HlRYScnrB5EhfRabVWqD7Mp7k46XM 9kY/qJp86jwlFTpKy4DpozR35JEp3VL+AQcihKBwvwXYc36LrrWWRevkfFVWnY1pZHHCcj rvVTQStLLTFpB+yIUJBvCDEaXfsIbum+daJCMBBLMZJDcpUeu5Ostyfh8YVskxT57TAFve RTYddduhPSA5yscudKZ/gBs4fCENf0pCdVbqP/UiMFP+lg8FGTB6TRkppwNkNA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1740561474; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=oAY7s3Py2zdV0fIbBnU8iAwnMWt29rUYTaq4TKJ83mE=; b=ZVIqUMyylyNzaekAm4WlJA/2UhbwY1I1YZW+X42ibfviJ38n/F1zjLW8akKG/9/S9jYLLG tfdk4h1keRA1HDAQ== From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior To: Florian Bezdeka Cc: "linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org" , "Ziegler, Andreas" , "Kiszka, Jan" , "MOESSBAUER, Felix" Subject: Re: 6.1-rt: NOHZ tick-stop error: local softirq work is pending Message-ID: <20250226091752.jCsLqq66@linutronix.de> References: <73c50e2fb53ba8cc2f1538abccc42e98fa63159b.camel@siemens.com> <20250224115557.AIFtijeu@linutronix.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On 2025-02-25 16:16:25 [+0100], Florian Bezdeka wrote: > > which version is this? I think is is an imported issue. Is v6.1.119-rt45 > > also affected? > > This is a typo, right? You mean it is an important issue, no? No, the version is correct. And I meant "imported" as in we got it from the stable queue. > We can see that on > > - v6.1.90-rt (Debian -rt kernel) > - v6.1.120-rt (Debian -rt kernel) > - v6.1.119-rt45 (So yes, this is also affected) > - v6.1.120-rt47 But if this is visible on v6.1.90-rt then it is not originating from what I assumed. > With PERIODIC you mean CONFIG_HZ_PERIODIC, right? correct. > We have CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL=y set but do net set the nohz_full= cmdline > parameter, so that we should get CONFIG_NO_HZ_IDLE behavior at the end. > > I realized today that the warning is somehow related to our RT tuning. > Enabling NAPI threading makes the warning go away, even if NAPI threads > are tuned the same way as ksoftirqd. NAPI threads? You have RPS enabled by any chance? Would commit dad6b97702639 ("net: Allow to use SMP threads for backlog NAPI.") 80d2eefcb4c84 ("net: Use backlog-NAPI to clean up the defer_list.") help? > I will have to look into that in more depth. > > Thanks for your input Sebastian. You are welcome. Sebastian