public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Problem with percpu values when bringing up second CPU?
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:44:38 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A78E406.8020605@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A78BD1A.9050001@goop.org>

Hello,

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> I just tracked down a bug I was having to a change where I changed one
> of my Xen event channel variables to a percpu variable, relating to
> masking an event channel.
> 
> The symptom was that shortly after bringing up the second CPU, the first
> CPU's timer events stopped arriving, apparently because they had become
> masked.

Hmmmm...

> The event channels masks are declared as:
> 
> #define NR_EVENT_CHANNEL_LONGS (NR_EVENT_CHANNELS/BITS_PER_LONG)
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long,
>                      cpu_evtchn_mask[NR_EVENT_CHANNEL_LONGS]) =
>        {[0 ... NR_EVENT_CHANNEL_LONGS-1] = ~0ul };	/* everything masked by default */
> 
> My theory about what's happening is that when the second CPU comes up,
> it allocates separate percpu areas for each CPU, but it is somehow
> failing to accurately copy CPU 0's percpu data over; either it isn't
> copying it all (ie, using the initialized values rather than the current
> values), or failing to copy the values in an interrupt-atomic way.
>
> Does this sound plausible?

Percpu areas aren't setup when the first cpu comes up.  They're
allocated and copied from the master copy during early init when only
the boot cpu is running.

> When I convert this back to an ad-hoc percpu variable (an array indexed
> by cpu number), it goes back to working.  Also, if I boot with maxcpus=1
> it also works with percpu data.

Hmmm... strange.  Can you try to print out the values along the boot
process and see when things go wrong?

> Also, because we don't have large pages under Xen, it always allocates
> percpu as 4k pages:
> 
> PERCPU: Allocated 21 4k pages, static data 82080 bytes

I don't think the choice of first chunk allocator would cause any
difference.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

      parent reply	other threads:[~2009-08-05  1:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-08-04 22:58 Problem with percpu values when bringing up second CPU? Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-08-05  1:31 ` Rusty Russell
2009-08-06 20:32   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-08-05  1:44 ` Tejun Heo [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=4A78E406.8020605@kernel.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=jeremy@goop.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    /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