From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, peterz@infradead.org, gorcunov@gmail.com,
aris@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
randy.dunlap@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 14:36:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100428123645.GA12017@nowhere> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1272039216-8890-2-git-send-email-dzickus@redhat.com>
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 12:13:29PM -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
> +void watchdog_overflow_callback(struct perf_event *event, int nmi,
> + struct perf_sample_data *data,
> + struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> + int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
> + unsigned long touch_ts = per_cpu(watchdog_touch_ts, this_cpu);
> + char warn = __get_cpu_var(watchdog_warn);
> +
> + if (touch_ts == 0) {
> + __touch_watchdog();
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + /* check for a hardlockup
> + * This is done by making sure our timer interrupt
> + * is incrementing. The timer interrupt should have
> + * fired multiple times before we overflow'd. If it hasn't
> + * then this is a good indication the cpu is stuck
> + */
> + if (is_hardlockup(this_cpu)) {
> + /* only print hardlockups once */
> + if (warn & HARDLOCKUP)
> + return;
> +
> + if (hardlockup_panic)
> + panic("Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu %d", this_cpu);
> + else
> + WARN(1, "Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu %d", this_cpu);
> +
> + __get_cpu_var(watchdog_warn) = warn | HARDLOCKUP;
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + __get_cpu_var(watchdog_warn) = warn & ~HARDLOCKUP;
> + return;
> +}
[...]
> +static enum hrtimer_restart watchdog_timer_fn(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
> +{
> + int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
> + unsigned long touch_ts = __get_cpu_var(watchdog_touch_ts);
> + char warn = __get_cpu_var(watchdog_warn);
> + struct pt_regs *regs = get_irq_regs();
> + int duration;
> +
> + /* kick the hardlockup detector */
> + watchdog_interrupt_count();
> +
> + /* kick the softlockup detector */
> + wake_up_process(__get_cpu_var(softlockup_watchdog));
> +
> + /* .. and repeat */
> + hrtimer_forward_now(hrtimer, ns_to_ktime(get_sample_period()));
> +
> + if (touch_ts == 0) {
> + __touch_watchdog();
> + return HRTIMER_RESTART;
> + }
> +
> + /* check for a softlockup
> + * This is done by making sure a high priority task is
> + * being scheduled. The task touches the watchdog to
> + * indicate it is getting cpu time. If it hasn't then
> + * this is a good indication some task is hogging the cpu
> + */
> + duration = is_softlockup(touch_ts, this_cpu);
> + if (unlikely(duration)) {
> + /* only warn once */
> + if (warn & SOFTLOCKUP)
> + return HRTIMER_RESTART;
> +
> + printk(KERN_ERR "BUG: soft lockup - CPU#%d stuck for %us! [%s:%d]\n",
> + this_cpu, duration,
> + current->comm, task_pid_nr(current));
> + print_modules();
> + print_irqtrace_events(current);
> + if (regs)
> + show_regs(regs);
> + else
> + dump_stack();
> +
> + if (softlockup_panic)
> + panic("softlockup: hung tasks");
> + __get_cpu_var(watchdog_warn) = warn | SOFTLOCKUP;
> + } else
> + __get_cpu_var(watchdog_warn) = warn & ~SOFTLOCKUP;
Note these watchdog_warn modifications are racy against the same that
happens with HARDLOCKUP. You might clear what did the nmi.
The race is harmless enough that we don't care much I think, but that's
why it would have make sense to separate watchdog_warn tracking space
between both.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-28 12:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-23 16:13 [PATCH 0/8] lockup detector changes Don Zickus
2010-04-23 16:13 ` [PATCH 1/8] [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup Don Zickus
2010-04-28 12:36 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2010-04-28 20:28 ` Don Zickus
2010-04-23 16:13 ` [PATCH 2/8] [watchdog] convert touch_softlockup_watchdog to touch_watchdog Don Zickus
2010-04-23 16:13 ` [PATCH 3/8] [watchdog] remove old softlockup code Don Zickus
2010-04-23 16:13 ` [PATCH 4/8] [watchdog] remove nmi_watchdog.c file Don Zickus
2010-04-23 16:13 ` [PATCH 5/8] [x86] watchdog: move trigger_all_cpu_backtrace to its own die_notifier Don Zickus
2010-04-23 16:13 ` [PATCH 6/8] [x86] watchdog: cleanup hw_nmi.c cruft Don Zickus
2010-04-23 16:13 ` [PATCH 7/8] [watchdog] resolve softlockup.c conflicts Don Zickus
2010-04-23 16:13 ` [PATCH 8/8] [watchdog] separate touch_nmi_watchdog code path from touch_watchdog Don Zickus
2010-04-28 12:48 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-04-28 20:28 ` Don Zickus
2010-04-27 1:44 ` [PATCH 0/8] lockup detector changes Frederic Weisbecker
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-05-07 21:11 Don Zickus
2010-05-07 21:11 ` [PATCH 1/8] [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup Don Zickus
2010-05-12 19:55 ` Frederic Weisbecker
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=20100428123645.GA12017@nowhere \
--to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=aris@redhat.com \
--cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=randy.dunlap@oracle.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