From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>, Ben Zhang <benzh@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] watchdog: print all locks on a softlock
Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 17:11:28 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140501211128.GC198341@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140501200858.GA27787@localhost.localdomain>
On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 10:09:01PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 03:17:20PM -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
> > On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 02:55:35PM -0400, Eric Paris wrote:
> > > If the CPU hits a softlockup this patch will also have it print the
> > > information about all locks being held on the system. This might help
> > > determine if a lock is being held too long leading to this problem.
> >
> > I am not sure this helps you. A softlockup is the result of pre-emption
> > disabled, ie the scheduler not being called after 60 seconds. Holding a
> > lock does not disable pre-emption usually. So I don't think this is going
> > to add anything.
> >
> > Are you trying to debug a hung task? The the hung_task thread checks to
> > see if a task hasn't scheduled in 2 minutes or so. That could be the
> > result of long lock (but that output already dumps the lockdep stuff).
>
> There may be some deadlocks that lockdep doesn't detect yet. 2 example:
>
> 1) spinlock <-> IPI dependency
>
>
> CPU 0 CPU 1
> --------------------------------------------------------
> spin_lock_irq(A)
> smp_send_function_single_async(CPU 1, func)
> //IPI
> func {
> spin_lock(1)
> }
>
> But this should be resolved with a virtual lock on the IPI functions.
> I should try that.
>
> 2) rwlock <-> IPI
>
> CPU 0 CPU 1
> --------------------------------------------------------
> read_lock(A)
> write_lock_irq(A)
> smp_send_function_single(CPU 1, func)
> //IPI never happens
The hardlockup detector would go off here. And dumping all the cpus in
the system (something we don't do today), would show this scenario. I see
this scenario a lot during page flushes on RHEL (a lot being once every
other month or so).
Cheers,
Don
>
> This one is much trickier.
>
> Anyway those are the only scenario I know of but there may be more. When possible
> we want to extend lockdep to detect new scenarios of deadlock but we don't have the
> guarantee that it can detect everything.
>
> So, could be useful...
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-01 21:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-01 18:55 [PATCH] watchdog: print all locks on a softlock Eric Paris
2014-05-01 19:17 ` Don Zickus
2014-05-01 20:09 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-05-01 20:43 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-05-01 21:11 ` 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=20140501211128.GC198341@redhat.com \
--to=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=benzh@chromium.org \
--cc=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
/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