From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Bug, sched, 5.8-rc2]: PREEMPT kernels crashing in check_preempt_wakeup() running fsx on XFS
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2020 20:30:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200627183042.GK4817@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200626223254.GH2005@dread.disaster.area>
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 08:32:54AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> Observation from the outside:
>
> "However I'm having trouble convincing myself that's actually
> possible on x86_64.... "
Using the weaker rules of LKMM (as relevant to Power) I could in fact
make it happen, the 'problem' is that it's being observed on the much
stronger x86_64.
So possibly I did overlook a more 'sensible' scenario, but I'm pretty
confident the problem holds as it fully explains the failure mode.
> This scheduler code has fallen off a really high ledge on the memory
> barrier cliff, hasn't it?
Just a wee bit.. I did need pen and paper and a fair amount of
scribbling for this one.
> Having looked at this code over the past 24 hours and the recent
> history, I know that understanding it - let alone debugging and
> fixing problem in it - is way beyond my capabilities. And I say
> that as an experienced kernel developer with a pretty good grasp of
> concurrent programming and a record of implementing a fair number of
> non-trivial lockless algorithms over the years....
All in the name of making it go fast, I suppose. It used to be much
simpler... like much of the kernel.
The biggest problem I had with this thing was that the reproduction case
we had (Paul's rcutorture) wouldn't readily trigger on my machines
(altough it did, but at a much lower rate, just twice in a week's worth
of runtime).
Also; I'm sure you can spot a problem in the I/O layer much faster than
I possibly could :-)
Anyway, let me know if you still observe any problems.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-27 18:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-26 0:47 [Bug, sched, 5.8-rc2]: PREEMPT kernels crashing in check_preempt_wakeup() running fsx on XFS Dave Chinner
2020-06-26 5:57 ` Dave Chinner
2020-06-26 7:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-06-26 22:32 ` Dave Chinner
2020-06-27 18:30 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2020-06-29 23:55 ` Dave Chinner
2020-06-30 8:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-07-01 2:26 ` Dave Chinner
2020-07-01 8:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-07-01 11:06 ` Dave Chinner
2020-07-01 13:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20200627183042.GK4817@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox