From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: ZAK Magnus <zakmagnus@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] Make hard lockup detection use timestamps
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 08:52:34 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110801125234.GE14343@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAuSN93ouWrPn9xWb9Zd3E2Dp0hQxC4JmFH1utbyy1_aMnfkLA@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 04:12:32PM -0700, ZAK Magnus wrote:
> Are you saying that any call to printk() will touch the watchdogs? I
> wasn't aware of that and it doesn't seem to comply with my
> observations too well, either. Then again, at the moment I don't
> understand some of the things I'm currently seeing so I could just be
> wrong.
I believe the serial console write is the source of all the
touch_nmi_watchdogs that result from a printk.
drivers/tty/serial/8250.c::serial8250_console_write()
Cheers,
Don
>
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 05:16:00PM -0700, ZAK Magnus wrote:
> >> No news?
> >>
> >> I've been testing and looking into issues and I realized dump_stack()
> >> calls touch_nmi_watchdog(). That wrecks what the patch is trying to do
> >> so I'm changing it to save the trace and print it later after the
> >> stall has completed. This would also resolve some other things you
> >> were saying weren't so good. Hopefully the logic is similar enough
> >> that some things you may have learned still apply.
> >
> > So yeah, the acting of printing was resesting the softlockup counter and
> > delaying it forever. In parallel, rcu has its own stall detector that was
> > going off after a minute or two.
> >
> > Once I routed the printk to trace_printk and disabled dump_stack,
> > everything started working as expected.
> >
> > Now the question is how to avoid shooting ourselves in the foot by
> > printk'ing a message without resetting the hard/soft lock watchdogs.
> >
> > I'll have to think about how to do that. If you can come up with any
> > ideas let me know.
> >
> > We almost need a quiet dump_stack that dumps to a buffer instead of the
> > console. But I am not sure that is worth the effort.
> >
> > Hmm.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Don
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-01 12:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-21 18:11 [PATCH v3 2/2] Make hard lockup detection use timestamps Alex Neronskiy
2011-07-22 19:53 ` Don Zickus
2011-07-22 22:34 ` ZAK Magnus
2011-07-25 12:44 ` Don Zickus
2011-07-29 0:16 ` ZAK Magnus
2011-07-29 13:10 ` Don Zickus
2011-07-29 20:55 ` Don Zickus
2011-07-29 23:12 ` ZAK Magnus
2011-08-01 12:52 ` Don Zickus [this message]
2011-08-01 18:33 ` ZAK Magnus
2011-08-01 19:24 ` Don Zickus
2011-08-01 20:11 ` ZAK Magnus
2011-08-03 18:27 ` ZAK Magnus
2011-08-03 19:44 ` Don Zickus
2011-08-03 19:11 ` Don Zickus
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=20110801125234.GE14343@redhat.com \
--to=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=msb@chromium.org \
--cc=zakmagnus@google.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