From: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@googlemail.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: "Bruno Prémont" <bonbons@linux-vserver.org>,
"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
"Mike Frysinger" <vapier.adi@gmail.com>,
"KOSAKI Motohiro" <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>,
"Pekka Enberg" <penberg@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.6.39-rc4+: Kernel leaking memory during FS scanning, regression?
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:44:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=guS_Vc3XAs0xfp6tBZP4FxudFQg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTik4+PAGHF-9KREYk8y+KDQLDAp2Mg@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8, Size: 7007 bytes --]
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 03:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:45:03AM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > not sure if my problem from linux-2.6-rcu.git#sedat.2011.04.23a is
>>> > related to the issue here.
>>> >
>>> > Just FYI:
>>> > I am here on a Pentium-M (uniprocessor aka UP) and still unsure if I
>>> > have the correct (optimal?) kernel-configs set.
>>> >
>>> > Paul gave me a script to collect RCU data and I enhanced it with
>>> > collecting SCHED data.
>>> >
>>> > In the above mentionned GIT branch I applied these two extra commits
>>> > (0001 requested by Paul and 0002 proposed by Thomas):
>>> >
>>> > patches/0001-Revert-rcu-restrict-TREE_RCU-to-SMP-builds-with-PREE.patch
>>> > patches/0002-sched-Add-warning-when-RT-throttling-is-activated.patch
>>> >
>>> > Furthermore, I have added my kernel-config file, scripts, patches and
>>> > logs (also output of 'cat /proc/cpuinfo').
>>> >
>>> > Hope this helps the experts to narrow down the problem.
>>>
>>> Yow!!!
>>>
>>> Now this one might well be able to hit the 950 millisecond limit.
>>> There are no fewer than 1,314,958 RCU callbacks queued up at the end of
>>> the test. Â And RCU has indeed noticed this and cranked up the number
>>> of callbacks to be handled by each invocation of rcu_do_batch() to
>>> 2,147,483,647. Â And only 15 seconds earlier, there were zero callbacks
>>> queued and the rcu_do_batch() limit was at the default of 10 callbacks
>>> per invocation.
>>
>> Yeah, yow. Â Once the RT throttle hit, it stuck.
>>
>>  .clock             : 1386824.201768
>>  .rt_nr_running         : 2
>>  .rt_throttled          : 1
>>  .rt_time            : 950.132427
>>  .rt_runtime           : 950.000000
>> Â Â Â Â Â rcuc0 Â Â 7 Â Â Â Â 0.034118 Â Â 10857 Â Â 98 Â Â Â Â 0.034118 Â Â Â 1472.309646 Â Â Â Â 0.000000 /
>> FF Â Â 1 Â Â Â 1 R Â Â R 0 [rcuc0]
>>  .clock             : 1402450.997994
>>  .rt_nr_running         : 2
>>  .rt_throttled          : 1
>>  .rt_time            : 950.132427
>>  .rt_runtime           : 950.000000
>> Â Â Â Â Â rcuc0 Â Â 7 Â Â Â Â 0.034118 Â Â 10857 Â Â 98 Â Â Â Â 0.034118 Â Â Â 1472.309646 Â Â Â Â 0.000000 /
>> FF Â Â 1 Â Â Â 1 R Â Â R 0 [rcuc0]
>>
>> ...
>>
>>  .clock             : 2707432.862374
>>  .rt_nr_running         : 2
>>  .rt_throttled          : 1
>>  .rt_time            : 950.132427
>>  .rt_runtime           : 950.000000
>> Â Â Â Â Â rcuc0 Â Â 7 Â Â Â Â 0.034118 Â Â 10857 Â Â 98 Â Â Â Â 0.034118 Â Â Â 1472.309646 Â Â Â Â 0.000000 /
>> FF Â Â 1 Â Â Â 1 R Â Â R 0 [rcuc0]
>>  .clock             : 2722572.958381
>>  .rt_nr_running         : 2
>>  .rt_throttled          : 1
>>  .rt_time            : 950.132427
>>  .rt_runtime           : 950.000000
>> Â Â Â Â Â rcuc0 Â Â 7 Â Â Â Â 0.034118 Â Â 10857 Â Â 98 Â Â Â Â 0.034118 Â Â Â 1472.309646 Â Â Â Â 0.000000 /
>> FF Â Â 1 Â Â Â 1 R Â Â R 0 [rcuc0]
>>
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> OK, I tried with the patch proposed by Thomas (0003):
>
> patches/0001-Revert-rcu-restrict-TREE_RCU-to-SMP-builds-with-PREE.patch
> patches/0002-sched-Add-warning-when-RT-throttling-is-activated.patch
> patches/0003-sched-Remove-skip_clock_update-check.patch
>
> From the very beginning it looked as the system is "stable" due to:
>
>  .rt_nr_running         : 0
>  .rt_throttled          : 0
>
> This changed when I started a simple tar-job to save my kernel
> build-dir to an external USB-hdd.
> From...
>
>  .rt_nr_running         : 1
>  .rt_throttled          : 1
>
> ...To:
>
>  .rt_nr_running         : 2
>  .rt_throttled          : 1
>
> Unfortunately, reducing all activities to a minimum load, did not
> change from last known RT throttling state.
>
> Just noticed rt_time exceeds the value of 950 first time here:
>
>  .rt_nr_running         : 1
>  .rt_throttled          : 1
>  .rt_time            : 950.005460
>
> Full data attchached as tarball.
>
> - Sedat -
>
> P.S.: Excerpt from
> collectdebugfs-v2_2.6.39-rc3-rcutree-sedat.2011.04.23a+.log (0:0 ->
> 1:1 -> 2:1)
>
> --
> rt_rq[0]:
>  .rt_nr_running         : 0
>  .rt_throttled          : 0
>  .rt_time            : 888.893877
>  .rt_runtime           : 950.000000
>
> runnable tasks:
>       task  PID     tree-key  switches  prio
> exec-runtime     sum-exec     sum-sleep
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> R       cat  2652   115108.993460     1  120
> 115108.993460 Â Â Â Â 1.147986 Â Â Â Â 0.000000 /
> --
> rt_rq[0]:
>  .rt_nr_running         : 1
>  .rt_throttled          : 1
>  .rt_time            : 950.005460
>  .rt_runtime           : 950.000000
>
> runnable tasks:
>       task  PID     tree-key  switches  prio
> exec-runtime     sum-exec     sum-sleep
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Â Â Â Â Â rcuc0 Â Â 7 Â Â Â Â 0.000000 Â Â 56869 Â Â 98
> 0.000000 Â Â Â 981.385605 Â Â Â Â 0.000000 /
> --
> rt_rq[0]:
>  .rt_nr_running         : 2
>  .rt_throttled          : 1
>  .rt_time            : 950.005460
>  .rt_runtime           : 950.000000
>
> runnable tasks:
>       task  PID     tree-key  switches  prio
> exec-runtime     sum-exec     sum-sleep
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Â Â Â Â Â rcuc0 Â Â 7 Â Â Â Â 0.000000 Â Â 56869 Â Â 98
> 0.000000 Â Â Â 981.385605 Â Â Â Â 0.000000 /
> --
>
As an addendum:
First call trace is seen after:
[ 651.616057] sched: RT throttling activated
[ 711.616033] INFO: rcu_sched_state detected stall on CPU 0 (t=15000 jiffies)
- Sedat -
ÿôèº{.nÇ+·®+%Ëÿ±éݶ\x17¥wÿº{.nÇ+·¥{±þG«éÿ{ayº\x1dÊÚë,j\a¢f£¢·hïêÿêçz_è®\x03(éÝ¢j"ú\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿ¾\a«þG«éÿ¢¸?¨èÚ&£ø§~á¶iOæ¬z·vØ^\x14\x04\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿÃ\fÿ¶ìÿ¢¸?I¥
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-28 15:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 88+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-24 18:21 2.6.39-rc4+: Kernel leaking memory during FS scanning, regression? Bruno Prémont
2011-04-24 21:59 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-25 2:42 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-25 7:47 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-04-25 9:17 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-25 9:25 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-04-25 10:34 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-25 11:41 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-25 11:47 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-04-25 12:11 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-25 12:14 ` Tetsuo Handa
2011-04-25 12:21 ` Tetsuo Handa
2011-04-25 15:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-04-25 16:04 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-25 16:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-04-25 17:00 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-25 17:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-04-25 17:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-04-25 18:36 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-25 19:16 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-25 21:10 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-25 21:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-25 21:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-04-25 21:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-26 6:19 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-26 11:27 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-26 16:38 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-26 17:09 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-26 17:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-04-26 22:28 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-04-27 6:15 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-27 18:41 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-27 19:16 ` Pádraig Brady
2011-04-27 19:34 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-27 22:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-27 20:40 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-27 22:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-28 6:10 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-27 22:06 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-04-27 22:27 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-27 22:32 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-04-27 22:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-27 23:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-04-27 23:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-04-28 9:09 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-04-28 9:17 ` Sedat Dilek
2011-04-28 9:40 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-04-28 10:12 ` Mike Galbraith
2011-04-28 9:45 ` Sedat Dilek
2011-04-28 10:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-28 13:30 ` Mike Galbraith
2011-04-28 15:28 ` Sedat Dilek
2011-04-28 15:44 ` Sedat Dilek [this message]
2011-04-28 15:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-04-28 18:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-04-28 20:23 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-28 20:29 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-04-28 20:44 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-28 21:04 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-04-28 21:51 ` john stultz
2011-04-28 22:02 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-04-28 23:06 ` Sedat Dilek
2011-04-28 23:35 ` Sedat Dilek
2011-04-29 0:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-29 9:34 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-04-29 7:55 ` Sedat Dilek
2011-04-29 18:09 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-04-29 18:26 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-04-29 19:31 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-29 20:10 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-04-29 20:14 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-30 9:14 ` Sedat Dilek
2011-04-28 20:41 ` Sedat Dilek
2011-04-28 19:22 ` Mike Galbraith
2011-04-27 21:55 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-28 6:22 ` Bruno Prémont
2011-04-28 10:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-26 17:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-04-26 18:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-26 19:17 ` Sedat Dilek
2011-04-27 22:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-25 22:08 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-04-25 17:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-25 18:13 ` Sedat Dilek
2011-04-25 18:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-25 17:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-04-27 10:28 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-04-25 17:51 ` Pekka Enberg
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='BANLkTi=guS_Vc3XAs0xfp6tBZP4FxudFQg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=sedat.dilek@googlemail.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=bonbons@linux-vserver.org \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paul.mckenney@linaro.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=sedat.dilek@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=vapier.adi@gmail.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).