From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762646AbYDVI7n (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Apr 2008 04:59:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1761953AbYDVI7b (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Apr 2008 04:59:31 -0400 Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:60787 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757764AbYDVI73 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Apr 2008 04:59:29 -0400 Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 01:59:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20080422.015931.70144614.davem@davemloft.net> To: mingo@elte.hu CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Soft lockup regression from today's sched.git merge. From: David Miller X-Mailer: Mew version 5.2 on Emacs 22.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org The following commit: commit 27ec4407790d075c325e1f4da0a19c56953cce23 Author: Ingo Molnar Date: Thu Feb 28 21:00:21 2008 +0100 sched: make cpu_clock() globally synchronous Alexey Zaytsev reported (and bisected) that the introduction of cpu_clock() in printk made the timestamps jump back and forth. Make cpu_clock() more reliable while still keeping it fast when it's called frequently. Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar causes watchdog triggers when a cpu exits NOHZ state when it has been there for >= the soft lockup threshold, for example here are some messages from a 128 cpu Niagara2 box: [ 168.106406] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#11 stuck for 128s! [dd:3239] [ 168.989592] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#21 stuck for 86s! [swapper:0] [ 168.999587] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#29 stuck for 91s! [make:4511] [ 168.999615] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#2 stuck for 85s! [swapper:0] [ 169.020514] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#37 stuck for 91s! [swapper:0] [ 169.020514] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#45 stuck for 91s! [sh:4515] [ 169.020515] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#69 stuck for 92s! [swapper:0] [ 169.020515] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#77 stuck for 92s! [swapper:0] [ 169.020515] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#61 stuck for 92s! [swapper:0] [ 169.112554] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#85 stuck for 92s! [swapper:0] [ 169.112554] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#101 stuck for 92s! [swapper:0] [ 169.112554] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#109 stuck for 92s! [swapper:0] [ 169.112554] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#117 stuck for 92s! [swapper:0] [ 169.171483] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#40 stuck for 80s! [dd:3239] [ 169.331483] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#13 stuck for 86s! [swapper:0] [ 169.351500] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#43 stuck for 101s! [dd:3239] [ 169.531482] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#9 stuck for 129s! [mkdir:4565] [ 169.595754] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#20 stuck for 93s! [swapper:0] [ 169.626787] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#52 stuck for 93s! [swapper:0] [ 169.626787] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#84 stuck for 92s! [swapper:0] [ 169.636812] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#116 stuck for 94s! [swapper:0] It's simple enough to trigger this by doing a 10 minute sleep after a fresh bootup then starting a parallel kernel build. I suspect this might be reintroducing a problem we've had and fixed before, see the thread: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=119546414004065&w=2 Please have a look, thank you.