From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: Jeffrey Merkey <jeffmerkey@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
atomlin@redhat.com, cmetcalf@ezchip.com, fweisbec@gmail.com,
hidehiro.kawai.ez@hitachi.com, mhocko@suse.cz, tj@kernel.org,
uobergfe@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] Add BUG_XX() debugging hard/soft lockup detection
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 15:14:53 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160203201453.GV26637@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+ekxPX9-WrLbjKfN+NFqBBaF9xF=08fE9e+806G-r0ArPHsig@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 10:23:42AM -0700, Jeffrey Merkey wrote:
> > Hmm, I am confused here. So you are saying because we are in the nmi
> > handler you can not break into the system? The nmi handler prints some
> > stuff to the screen, pokes the other cpus to print stuff to the screen and
> > then returns to a normal operation. Unless you are saying the act of
> > sending NMI IPIs never completes (because a cpu is blocking IPI
> > interrupts),
> > so the cpu hangs in nmi context and the debugger never has a chance to
> > 'break' in and see what is going on?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Don
> >
>
> Yes. the nmi handlers never complete for the bug I worked on with
> tglx, probably because an nmi handler is calling timekeeper.c
> somewhere. Some of these lockup bugs may be calling code from the nmi
> handlers that cause the lockup condition in the first place in some
> cases, so it will never reach a call to panic. Looking over this code
> it's damn hard to find a good way to do this that works across all the
> arches without adding another macro to bug.h (BREAK_ON maybe), so I
> just used one that's already there. I'll go back and rethink this
> some more. It could just be as simple as calling panic from the first
> detection -- that works.
So, if you disable 'sysctl_hardlockup_all_cpu_backtrace' and enable
'hardlockup_panic', you should be able to achieve what you want, no?
But you mentioned you wanted to recover? Hence avoiding the panic?
Cheers,
Don
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-03 20:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-02 2:33 [PATCH v5 1/3] Add BUG_XX() debugging options Jeffrey Merkey
2016-02-02 2:33 ` [PATCH v5 2/3] Add BUG_XX() debugging options Kconfig.debug Jeffrey Merkey
2016-02-02 2:33 ` [PATCH v5 3/3] Add BUG_XX() debugging hard/soft lockup detection Jeffrey Merkey
2016-02-02 17:30 ` Don Zickus
2016-02-02 22:40 ` Jeffrey Merkey
2016-02-03 4:17 ` Jeffrey Merkey
2016-02-03 4:39 ` Jeffrey Merkey
2016-02-03 15:45 ` Don Zickus
2016-02-03 17:23 ` Jeffrey Merkey
2016-02-03 20:14 ` Don Zickus [this message]
2016-02-03 20:18 ` Jeffrey Merkey
2016-02-04 2:48 ` Jeffrey Merkey
2016-02-03 15:47 ` Don Zickus
2016-02-03 17:26 ` Jeffrey Merkey
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=20160203201453.GV26637@redhat.com \
--to=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=atomlin@redhat.com \
--cc=cmetcalf@ezchip.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=hidehiro.kawai.ez@hitachi.com \
--cc=jeffmerkey@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=uobergfe@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