From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
pbonzini@redhat.com, mingo@redhat.com,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
chai wen <chaiw.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] softlockup: make detector be aware of task switch of processes hogging cpu
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 11:03:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140818090319.GA25495@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1407768567-171794-3-git-send-email-dzickus@redhat.com>
* Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com> wrote:
> From: chai wen <chaiw.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
>
> For now, soft lockup detector warns once for each case of process softlockup.
> But the thread 'watchdog/n' may not always get the cpu at the time slot between
> the task switch of two processes hogging that cpu to reset soft_watchdog_warn.
>
> An example would be two processes hogging the cpu. Process A causes the
> softlockup warning and is killed manually by a user. Process B immediately
> becomes the new process hogging the cpu preventing the softlockup code from
> resetting the soft_watchdog_warn variable.
>
> This case is a false negative of "warn only once for a process", as there may
> be a different process that is going to hog the cpu. Resolve this by
> saving/checking the pid of the hogging process and use that to reset
> soft_watchdog_warn too.
>
> Signed-off-by: chai wen <chaiw.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
> [modified the comment and changelog to be more specific]
> Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
> ---
> kernel/watchdog.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
> index 4c2e11c..6d0a891 100644
> --- a/kernel/watchdog.c
> +++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
> @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(bool, softlockup_touch_sync);
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(bool, soft_watchdog_warn);
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, hrtimer_interrupts);
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, soft_lockup_hrtimer_cnt);
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(pid_t, softlockup_warn_pid_saved);
> #ifdef CONFIG_HARDLOCKUP_DETECTOR
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(bool, hard_watchdog_warn);
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(bool, watchdog_nmi_touch);
> @@ -317,6 +318,8 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart watchdog_timer_fn(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
> */
> duration = is_softlockup(touch_ts);
> if (unlikely(duration)) {
> + pid_t pid = task_pid_nr(current);
> +
> /*
> * If a virtual machine is stopped by the host it can look to
> * the watchdog like a soft lockup, check to see if the host
> @@ -326,8 +329,20 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart watchdog_timer_fn(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
> return HRTIMER_RESTART;
>
> /* only warn once */
> - if (__this_cpu_read(soft_watchdog_warn) == true)
> + if (__this_cpu_read(soft_watchdog_warn) == true) {
> +
> + /*
> + * Handle the case where multiple processes are
> + * causing softlockups but the duration is small
> + * enough, the softlockup detector can not reset
> + * itself in time. Use pids to detect this.
> + */
> + if (__this_cpu_read(softlockup_warn_pid_saved) != pid) {
So I agree with the motivation of this improvement, but is this
implementation namespace-safe?
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-18 9:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-08-11 14:49 [PATCH 0/5] watchdog: various fixes Don Zickus
2014-08-11 14:49 ` [PATCH 1/5] watchdog: remove unnecessary head files Don Zickus
2014-08-18 18:03 ` [tip:perf/watchdog] watchdog: Remove unnecessary header files tip-bot for chai wen
2014-08-11 14:49 ` [PATCH 2/5] softlockup: make detector be aware of task switch of processes hogging cpu Don Zickus
2014-08-18 9:03 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2014-08-18 15:06 ` Don Zickus
2014-08-18 18:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-08-18 18:43 ` Don Zickus
2014-08-18 19:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-08-18 20:38 ` Don Zickus
2014-08-19 1:36 ` Chai Wen
2014-08-21 1:37 ` Chai Wen
2014-08-21 2:30 ` Don Zickus
2014-08-21 5:42 ` [PATCH] " chai wen
2014-08-22 1:12 ` Chai Wen
2014-08-22 1:58 ` Don Zickus
2014-08-26 12:51 ` Chai Wen
2014-08-26 14:22 ` Don Zickus
2014-08-27 1:33 ` Chai Wen
2014-08-11 14:49 ` [PATCH 3/5] watchdog: fix print-once on enable Don Zickus
2014-08-18 9:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-08-18 9:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-08-18 15:07 ` Don Zickus
2014-08-18 18:03 ` [tip:perf/watchdog] watchdog: Fix " tip-bot for Ulrich Obergfell
2014-08-11 14:49 ` [PATCH 4/5] watchdog: control hard lockup detection default Don Zickus
2014-08-18 9:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-08-18 15:07 ` Don Zickus
2014-08-18 9:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-08-18 10:44 ` Ulrich Obergfell
2014-08-18 15:17 ` Don Zickus
2014-08-18 18:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-08-18 18:53 ` Don Zickus
2014-08-18 19:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-08-11 14:49 ` [PATCH 5/5] kvm: ensure hard lockup detection is disabled by default 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=20140818090319.GA25495@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chaiw.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).