* [PATCH 1/4 v2] nmi: Provide the option to issue an NMI back trace to every cpu but current
2014-04-04 20:47 [PATCH 0/4 V2] Print traces on softlockups Don Zickus
@ 2014-04-04 20:47 ` Don Zickus
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Don Zickus @ 2014-04-04 20:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML; +Cc: akpm, x86, davem, sparclinux, mguzik, Aaron Tomlin, Don Zickus
From: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@redhat.com>
Some times it is preferred not to use the
trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() routine when one wants
to avoid capturing a back trace for current.
For instance if one was previously captured
recently.
This patch provides a new routine namely
trigger_allbutself_cpu_backtrace() which offers
the flexibility to issue an NMI to every cpu but
current and capture a back trace accordingly.
[Added stub in #else clause - dcz]
Signed-off-by: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
---
include/linux/nmi.h | 11 ++++++++++-
1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/nmi.h b/include/linux/nmi.h
index 6a45fb5..a17ab63 100644
--- a/include/linux/nmi.h
+++ b/include/linux/nmi.h
@@ -32,15 +32,24 @@ static inline void touch_nmi_watchdog(void)
#ifdef arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace
static inline bool trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(void)
{
- arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace();
+ arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(true);
return true;
}
+static inline bool trigger_allbutself_cpu_backtrace(void)
+{
+ arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(false);
+ return true;
+}
#else
static inline bool trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(void)
{
return false;
}
+static inline bool trigger_allbutself_cpu_backtrace(void)
+{
+ return false;
+}
#endif
#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKUP_DETECTOR
--
1.7.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 1/4 v2] nmi: Provide the option to issue an NMI back trace to every cpu but current
[not found] ` <20140421132100.GW8488@redhat.com>
@ 2014-04-21 13:41 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-04-21 15:47 ` Don Zickus
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Oleg Nesterov @ 2014-04-21 13:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Don Zickus; +Cc: Aaron Tomlin, mingo, mingo, linux-kernel
On 04/21, Don Zickus wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 07:26:49PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 04/15, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > >
> > > Looking at https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/4/469... It seems that 2/4 can be
> > > simplified, you can simply remove smp_processor_id() from backtrace_mask
> > > if !include_self and use apic->send_IPI_mask(backtrace_mask). But this is
> > > minor, I won't insist.
> >
> > And in fact, I do not understand why arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() doesn't
> > disable preemption. OK, probably we can simply ignore the race with cpu hotplug.
> >
> > But it seems that your patch makes the things worse. Lets look at, say,
> > numachip_send_IPI_mask_allbutself(). The usage of smp_processor_id() is
> > obviously racy but perhaps we do not care again. But we do not want a warning
> > from debug_smp_processor_id().
>
> Good point. I forgot that going from all cpus down to allbutself,
> preemption now matters.
I am not sure it actually matters wrt "show other CPU's traces". If the preemption
is possible then the caller can be preempted even before it sends ipi.
OTOH I think it does matter anyway, even without your patch, otherwise the usage
of cpu_online_mask is racy and we can hit the "Wait for up to 10 seconds" case.
Btw...
/* Wait for up to 10 seconds for all CPUs to do the backtrace */
for (i = 0; i < 10 * 1000; i++) {
if (cpumask_empty(to_cpumask(backtrace_mask)))
break;
mdelay(1);
}
OK, but perhaps we should clear backtrace_mask if we return due to timeout.
> does disabling preemption help in the cpu
> hotplug case?
Yes. But I'd suggest to change your patch to use get_cpu() instead of
preempt_disable/smp_processor_id.
And I think it would be better to not discuss this off-list, I added lkml.
Oleg.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/4 v2] nmi: Provide the option to issue an NMI back trace to every cpu but current
2014-04-21 13:41 ` [PATCH 1/4 v2] nmi: Provide the option to issue an NMI back trace to every cpu but current Oleg Nesterov
@ 2014-04-21 15:47 ` Don Zickus
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Don Zickus @ 2014-04-21 15:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Oleg Nesterov; +Cc: Aaron Tomlin, mingo, mingo, linux-kernel
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 03:41:54PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 04/21, Don Zickus wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 07:26:49PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > On 04/15, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Looking at https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/4/469... It seems that 2/4 can be
> > > > simplified, you can simply remove smp_processor_id() from backtrace_mask
> > > > if !include_self and use apic->send_IPI_mask(backtrace_mask). But this is
> > > > minor, I won't insist.
> > >
> > > And in fact, I do not understand why arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() doesn't
> > > disable preemption. OK, probably we can simply ignore the race with cpu hotplug.
> > >
> > > But it seems that your patch makes the things worse. Lets look at, say,
> > > numachip_send_IPI_mask_allbutself(). The usage of smp_processor_id() is
> > > obviously racy but perhaps we do not care again. But we do not want a warning
> > > from debug_smp_processor_id().
> >
> > Good point. I forgot that going from all cpus down to allbutself,
> > preemption now matters.
>
> I am not sure it actually matters wrt "show other CPU's traces". If the preemption
> is possible then the caller can be preempted even before it sends ipi.
>
> OTOH I think it does matter anyway, even without your patch, otherwise the usage
> of cpu_online_mask is racy and we can hit the "Wait for up to 10 seconds" case.
Hmm, I understand what you are saying now.
>
> Btw...
>
> /* Wait for up to 10 seconds for all CPUs to do the backtrace */
> for (i = 0; i < 10 * 1000; i++) {
> if (cpumask_empty(to_cpumask(backtrace_mask)))
> break;
> mdelay(1);
> }
>
> OK, but perhaps we should clear backtrace_mask if we return due to timeout.
I can look at that.
>
> > does disabling preemption help in the cpu
> > hotplug case?
>
> Yes. But I'd suggest to change your patch to use get_cpu() instead of
> preempt_disable/smp_processor_id.
ok. Originally I was thinking of the remote hotplug cpu case, which
pre-emption won't block. But forgot about the local cpu hotplug case.
>
> And I think it would be better to not discuss this off-list, I added lkml.
>
> Oleg.
>
Thanks!
Cheers,
Don
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-04-21 15:47 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20140415075650.GG2195@atomlin.usersys.redhat.com>
[not found] ` <20140415170202.GA7948@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <20140415172649.GA10152@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <20140421132100.GW8488@redhat.com>
2014-04-21 13:41 ` [PATCH 1/4 v2] nmi: Provide the option to issue an NMI back trace to every cpu but current Oleg Nesterov
2014-04-21 15:47 ` Don Zickus
2014-04-04 20:47 [PATCH 0/4 V2] Print traces on softlockups Don Zickus
2014-04-04 20:47 ` [PATCH 1/4 v2] nmi: Provide the option to issue an NMI back trace to every cpu but current Don Zickus
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).