public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Stupid futex question - 2.6.33-rc7-mmotm0210
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 11:42:15 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7380.1266511335@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:37:59 +0100." <1266503879.26719.702.camel@laptop>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2209 bytes --]

(Adding some cc: to the list)

On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:37:59 +0100, Peter Zijlstra said:
> On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 09:04 -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> > Kernel: x86_64 2.6.33-rc7-mmotm0210
> > 
> > I'm debugging a problem where pulseaudio is getting killed with a SIGKILL
> > out of the blue.  It appears to be a problem where pulseaudio sets
> > RLIMIT_RTTIME and the bound gets exceeded.  Analysis with 'top' shows
> > a short spike of 96% system time, and the tail end of strace shows this:
> > 
> > [pid 25065] 01:50:20.371484 ioctl(28, USBDEVFS_CONTROL, 0x7fd3d76f630c) = 0 <0.000015>
> > [pid 25065] 01:50:20.371548 ioctl(28, 0x40045532, 0x7fd3d76f636c) = 0 <0.000016>
> > [pid 25065] 01:50:20.371611 open("/dev/snd/pcmC0D0p", O_RDWR|O_NONBLOCK|O_CLOEXEC <unfinished ...>
> > [pid 25064] 01:50:20.371678 <... write resumed> ) = 8 <0.002104>
> > [pid 25064] 01:50:20.371718 futex(0xc2ec00, FUTEX_WAIT_PRIVATE, 0, NULL <unfinished ...>
> > [pid 25066] 01:50:21.408392 +++ killed by SIGKILL +++
> > PANIC: handle_group_exit: 25066 leader 25064
> > [pid 25065] 01:50:21.408442 +++ killed by SIGKILL +++
> > PANIC: handle_group_exit: 25065 leader 25064
> > 01:50:21.420354 +++ killed by SIGKILL +++
> > 
> > thread 25064 apparently gets gunned down due to RTTIME because it spent a whole
> > second in a futex() call - is it reasonable for futex() to not return for that
> > long?
> > 
> > In other words - kernel bug because futex() should return, or pulseaudio bug
> > for not understanding futex() can snooze a while?
> > 
> > If a kernel bug, anybody got a better idea than nuking the RLIMIT_RTTIME call,
> > waiting for it to repeat (takes between 1 minute and 1 hour or so), and
> > whomping it a few times with sysrq-T?
> 
> is that second spend in processing sysrq-t?

No, currently that second is spent in a futex() syscall - I'm wondering:

1) should it get killed for RLIMIT_RTTIME because it's been in a futex()
for multiple seconds? It seems suspicious - docs say a blocking syscall
resets RTTIME - so if futex() blocks it shouldn't kill, and if it's in the
kernel for a second without blocking it's a bug too.

2) Is sysrq-T my best bet here, or should I be trying something else first?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 227 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2010-02-18 16:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-18 14:04 Stupid futex question - 2.6.33-rc7-mmotm0210 Valdis.Kletnieks
2010-02-18 14:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-18 16:42   ` Valdis.Kletnieks [this message]
2010-02-18 17:01     ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-18 18:45     ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-02-19  4:08 ` Darren Hart

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=7380.1266511335@localhost \
    --to=valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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