From: Zhang Zhen <zhenzhang.zhang@huawei.com>
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Cc: <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<morgan.wang@huawei.com>, <josh@freedesktop.org>,
<dipankar@in.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: RCU CPU stall console spews leads to soft lockup disabled is reasonable ?
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:13:27 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54BF1957.6080606@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54BF0E53.5040409@huawei.com>
On 2015/1/21 10:26, Zhang Zhen wrote:
> On 2015/1/20 23:25, Don Zickus wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:09:19AM +0800, Zhang Zhen wrote:
>>>
>>>> Of course back then, touch_nmi_watchdog touched all cpus. So a problem
>>>> like this was masked. I believe this upstream commit 62572e29bc53, solved
>>>> the problem.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your suggestion.
>>>
>>> Commit 62572e29bc53 changed the semantics of touch_nmi_watchdog and make it
>>> only touch local cpu not every one.
>>> But watchdog_nmi_touch = true only guarantee no hard lockup check on this cpu.
>>>
>>> Commit 62572e29bc53 didn't changed the semantics of touch_softlockup_watchdog.
>>
>> Ah, yes. I reviewed the commit to quickly yesterday. I thought
>> touch_softlockup_watchdog was called on every cpu and that commit changed
>> it to the local cpu. But that was incorrect.
>>
>>>>
>>>> You can apply that commit and see if you if you get both RCU stall
>>>> messages _and_ softlockup messages. I believe that is what you were
>>>> expecting, correct?
>>>>
>>> Correct, i expect i can get both RCU stall messages _and_ softlockup messages.
>>> I applied that commit, and i only got RCU stall messages.
>>
>> Hmm, I believe the act of printing to the console calls touch_nmi_watchdog
>> which calls touch_softlockup_watchdog. I think that is the problem there.
>>
> Yeah, you are right.
>
>> This may not cause other problems but what happens if you comment out the
>> 'touch_softlockup_watchdog' from the touch_nmi_watchdog function like
>> below (based on latest upstream cb59670870)?
>>
>> The idea is that console printing for that cpu won't reset the softlockup
>> detector. Again other bad things might happen and this patch may not be a
>> good final solution, but it can help give me a clue about what is going
>> on.
>
> I commented out the 'touch_softlockup_watchdog' from the touch_nmi_watchdog function
> (based on latest upstream ec6f34e5b552).
> This triggered RCU stall and softlockup, but softlockup just printk only once.
> As you mentioned "other bad things" lead to softlockup just printk only once.
> What's the bad thing ?
>
> / #
> / # echo 60 > /proc/sys/kernel/watchdog_thresh
> / # busybox insmod softlockup_test.ko &
> / # [ 39.044058] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=21002 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 39.044058] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 102.049045] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=84007 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 102.049045] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 160.482123] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 134s! [busybox:54]
> [ 165.054075] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=147012 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 165.054075] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 228.059045] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=210017 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 228.059045] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 291.064099] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=273022 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 291.064099] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 354.069074] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=336027 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 354.069099] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 417.074045] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=399032 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 417.074045] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 480.079099] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=462037 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 480.079099] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 543.084099] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=525042 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 543.084099] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 606.089101] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=588047 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 606.089101] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 669.094099] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=651052 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 669.094099] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 732.099045] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=714057 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 732.099045] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 795.104074] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=777062 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 795.104098] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 858.109046] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=840067 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 858.109046] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 921.114100] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=903072 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 921.114100] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 984.119099] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=966077 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 984.119099] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 1047.124075] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=1029082 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 1047.124099] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 1110.129046] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=1092087 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 1110.129046] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 1173.134045] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=1155092 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 1173.134045] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 1236.139101] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=1218097 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 1236.139101] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 1299.144059] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=1281102 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 1299.144059] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 1362.149099] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=1344107 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 1362.149099] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 1425.154059] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=1407112 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 1425.154059] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 1488.159046] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=1470117 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 1488.159046] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 1551.164045] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=1533122 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 1551.164045] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 1614.169057] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=1596127 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 1614.169057] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 1677.174060] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=1659132 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 1677.174060] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 1740.179045] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=1722137 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 1740.179045] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 1803.184075] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=1785142 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 1803.184101] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 1866.189046] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=1848147 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 1866.189046] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 1929.194045] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=1911152 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 1929.194045] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 1992.199083] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=1974157 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 1992.199083] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 2055.204098] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=2037162 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 2055.204098] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 2118.209045] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=2100167 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 2118.209045] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
> [ 2181.214098] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=2163172 jiffies, g=78, c=77, q=4)
> [ 2181.214098] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
Sorry, i made a mistake, the log above is based on v3.10.63.
I have tested the latest upstream kernel (based on ec6f34e5b552),
but my test case can't triggered RCU stall warning.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Don
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
>> index 70bf118..833c015 100644
>> --- a/kernel/watchdog.c
>> +++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
>> @@ -209,7 +209,7 @@ void touch_nmi_watchdog(void)
>> * going off.
>> */
>> raw_cpu_write(watchdog_nmi_touch, true);
>> - touch_softlockup_watchdog();
>> + //touch_softlockup_watchdog();
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(touch_nmi_watchdog);
>>
>>
>> .
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-21 3:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-19 8:07 RCU CPU stall console spews leads to soft lockup disabled is reasonable ? Zhang Zhen
2015-01-19 8:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-01-19 9:04 ` Zhang Zhen
2015-01-19 11:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-01-20 3:17 ` Zhang Zhen
2015-01-20 3:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-01-19 14:06 ` Don Zickus
2015-01-20 3:09 ` Zhang Zhen
2015-01-20 15:25 ` Don Zickus
2015-01-21 2:26 ` Zhang Zhen
2015-01-21 3:13 ` Zhang Zhen [this message]
2015-01-21 6:54 ` Zhang Zhen
2015-01-21 7:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-01-21 7:25 ` Zhang Zhen
2015-01-21 9:05 ` Zhang Zhen
2015-01-21 10:16 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-01-21 11:11 ` Zhang Zhen
2015-01-21 20:04 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-01-21 15:10 ` Don Zickus
2015-01-21 20:06 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-01-22 3:08 ` Zhang Zhen
2015-01-22 5:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=54BF1957.6080606@huawei.com \
--to=zhenzhang.zhang@huawei.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=josh@freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=morgan.wang@huawei.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.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).