From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
x86@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
mguzik@redhat.com, Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 v4] watchdog: Printing traces for all cpus on lockup detection
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 09:50:05 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140424135005.GP5328@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140424134804.GE8488@redhat.com>
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 09:48:04AM -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 02:14:07PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 16:40:05 -0400 Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@redhat.com>
> > >
> > > A 'softlockup' is defined as a bug that causes the kernel to
> > > loop in kernel mode for more than a predefined period to
> > > time, without giving other tasks a chance to run.
> > >
> > > Currently, upon detection of this condition by the per-cpu
> > > watchdog task, debug information (including a stack trace)
> > > is sent to the system log.
> > >
> > > On some occasions, we have observed that the "victim" rather
> > > than the actual "culprit" (i.e. the owner/holder of the
> > > contended resource) is reported to the user.
> > > Often this information has proven to be insufficient to
> > > assist debugging efforts.
> > >
> > > To avoid loss of useful debug information, for architectures
> > > which support NMI, this patch makes it possible to improve
> > > soft lockup reporting. This is accomplished by issuing an
> > > NMI to each cpu to obtain a stack trace.
> > >
> > > If NMI is not supported we just revert back to the old method.
> > > A sysctl and boot-time parameter is available to toggle this
> > > feature.
> > >
> > > --- a/include/linux/nmi.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/nmi.h
> > > @@ -57,6 +57,9 @@ int hw_nmi_is_cpu_stuck(struct pt_regs *);
> > > u64 hw_nmi_get_sample_period(int watchdog_thresh);
> > > extern int watchdog_user_enabled;
> > > extern int watchdog_thresh;
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > > +extern int sysctl_softlockup_all_cpu_backtrace;
> > > +#endif
> >
> > The ifdefs aren't really needed here. If we omit them then error
> > reporting happens at link time rather than at compile time, but that's
> > a small price to pay for cleaning up the code.
> >
> > > + if (softlockup_all_cpu_backtrace) {
> > > + /* Prevent multiple soft-lockup reports if one cpu is already
> > > + * engaged in dumping cpu back traces
> > > + */
> > > + if (test_and_set_bit(0, &soft_lockup_nmi_warn)) {
> > > + /* Someone else will report us. Let's give up */
> > > + __this_cpu_write(soft_watchdog_warn, true);
> > > + return HRTIMER_RESTART;
> > > + }
> > > + }
> >
> > You missed my suggestion here.
> >
> > text data bss dec hex filename
> > 1519 524 24 2067 813 kernel/watchdog.o-before
> > 1471 520 16 2007 7d7 kernel/watchdog.o-after
> >
> >
> > --- a/include/linux/nmi.h~watchdog-printing-traces-for-all-cpus-on-lockup-detection-fix
> > +++ a/include/linux/nmi.h
> > @@ -57,9 +57,7 @@ int hw_nmi_is_cpu_stuck(struct pt_regs *
> > u64 hw_nmi_get_sample_period(int watchdog_thresh);
> > extern int watchdog_user_enabled;
> > extern int watchdog_thresh;
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > extern int sysctl_softlockup_all_cpu_backtrace;
> > -#endif
> > struct ctl_table;
> > extern int proc_dowatchdog(struct ctl_table *, int ,
> > void __user *, size_t *, loff_t *);
> > --- a/kernel/watchdog.c~watchdog-printing-traces-for-all-cpus-on-lockup-detection-fix
> > +++ a/kernel/watchdog.c
> > @@ -31,7 +31,12 @@
> >
> > int watchdog_user_enabled = 1;
> > int __read_mostly watchdog_thresh = 10;
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > int __read_mostly sysctl_softlockup_all_cpu_backtrace;
> > +#else
> > +#define sysctl_softlockup_all_cpu_backtrace 0
> > +#endif
> > +
> > static int __read_mostly watchdog_running;
> > static u64 __read_mostly sample_period;
> >
> > _
>
> Ah ok. I will respin the patch with that cleanup. Thanks!
Or I can just be happy you took care of that for me. :-)
/me should read all his email first...
Thanks,
Don
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-24 14:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-23 20:40 [PATCH 0/2 V4] Print traces on softlockup Don Zickus
2014-04-23 20:40 ` [PATCH 1/2 v4] nmi: Provide the option to issue an NMI back trace to every cpu but current Don Zickus
2014-04-23 20:40 ` [PATCH 2/2 v4] watchdog: Printing traces for all cpus on lockup detection Don Zickus
2014-04-23 21:14 ` Andrew Morton
2014-04-24 13:48 ` Don Zickus
2014-04-24 13:50 ` Don Zickus [this message]
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=20140424135005.GP5328@redhat.com \
--to=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=atomlin@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mguzik@redhat.com \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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