From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>
To: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>,
"jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com >> Jeff Kirsher"
<jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>,
"jesse.brandeburg@intel.com >> Jesse Brandeburg"
<jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
"bruce.w.allan@intel.com >> Bruce Allan"
<bruce.w.allan@intel.com>,
"donald.c.skidmore@intel.com >> Don Skidmore"
<donald.c.skidmore@intel.com>,
gregory.v.rose@intel.com,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org >> Netdev" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: BUG: soft lockup happened for ixgbevf
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 09:25:24 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <565DD804.1080503@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <565D4860.2060108@huawei.com>
On 11/30/2015 11:12 PM, Ding Tianhong wrote:
> Hi Everyone:
>
> I found this problem when using the Testgine to send package to the 82599 ethernet:
> 1.wait for the speed to 10G/bit, it's ok.
> 2.then down the eth and then up, loop for several times.
> 3.then the softlockup happened.
> [ 317.005148] IPv6: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): eth2: link becomes ready
> [ 368.106005] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 22s! [rcuos/1:15]
> [ 368.106005] Hardware name: Bochs Bochs, BIOS Bochs 01/01/2011
> [ 368.106005] task: ffff88057dd8a220 ti: ffff88057dd9c000 task.ti: ffff88057dd9c000
> [ 368.106005] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff81579e04>] [<ffffffff81579e04>] fib_table_lookup+0x14/0x390
> [ 368.106005] RSP: 0018:ffff88061fc83ce8 EFLAGS: 00000286
> [ 368.106005] RAX: 0000000000000001 RBX: 00000000020155c0 RCX: 0000000000000001
> [ 368.106005] RDX: ffff88061fc83d50 RSI: ffff88061fc83d70 RDI: ffff880036d11a00
> [ 368.106005] RBP: ffff88061fc83d08 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000000
> [ 368.106005] R10: ffff880036d11a00 R11: ffffffff819e0900 R12: ffff88061fc83c58
> [ 368.106005] R13: ffffffff816154dd R14: ffff88061fc83d08 R15: 00000000020155c0
> [ 368.106005] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88061fc80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> [ 368.106005] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> [ 368.106005] CR2: 00007f8c2aee9c40 CR3: 000000057b222000 CR4: 00000000000407e0
> [ 368.106005] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
> [ 368.106005] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
> [ 368.106005] Stack:
> [ 368.106005] 00000000010000c0 ffff88057b766000 ffff8802e380b000 ffff88057af03e00
> [ 368.106005] ffff88061fc83dc0 ffffffff815349a6 ffff88061fc83d40 ffffffff814ee146
> [ 368.106005] ffff8802e380af00 00000000e380af00 ffffffff819e0900 020155c0010000c0
> [ 368.106005] Call Trace:
> [ 368.106005] <IRQ>
> [ 368.106005]
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff815349a6>] ip_route_input_noref+0x516/0xbd0
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff814ee146>] ? skb_release_data+0xd6/0x110
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff814ee20a>] ? kfree_skb+0x3a/0xa0
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff8153698f>] ip_rcv_finish+0x29f/0x350
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff81537034>] ip_rcv+0x234/0x380
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff814fd656>] __netif_receive_skb_core+0x676/0x870
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff814fd868>] __netif_receive_skb+0x18/0x60
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff814fe4de>] process_backlog+0xae/0x180
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff814fdcb2>] net_rx_action+0x152/0x240
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff81077b3f>] __do_softirq+0xef/0x280
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff8161619c>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x30
> [ 368.106005] <EOI>
> [ 368.106005]
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff81015d95>] do_softirq+0x65/0xa0
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff81077174>] local_bh_enable+0x94/0xa0
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff81114922>] rcu_nocb_kthread+0x232/0x370
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff81098250>] ? wake_up_bit+0x30/0x30
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff811146f0>] ? rcu_start_gp+0x40/0x40
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff8109728f>] kthread+0xcf/0xe0
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff810971c0>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x140/0x140
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff816147d8>] ret_from_fork+0x58/0x90
> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff810971c0>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x140/0x140
>
> I have test this on kernel 3.10 and kernel 4.3, both exist this problem.
> Thanks for any suggestion.
So I have a couple questions. First what kernel was the above trace
captured with? Are you using the in-kernel driver or did you download
one and build it out-of-tree? If you are using the in-tree then I can
assume the above trace is with kernel version 3.10 since the ixgbevf
driver was fixed to not use the backlog several versions ago.
Can you povide the trace for the 4.3 kernel? It would greatly help as
the 3.10 kernel is a bit old and a reproduction on the 4.3 kernel or
net-next would go a long way toward allowing us to figure out the root
cause.
Thanks.
- Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-01 17:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-01 7:12 BUG: soft lockup happened for ixgbevf Ding Tianhong
2015-12-01 17:25 ` Alexander Duyck [this message]
2015-12-03 3:34 ` Ding Tianhong
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=565DD804.1080503@gmail.com \
--to=alexander.duyck@gmail.com \
--cc=bruce.w.allan@intel.com \
--cc=dingtianhong@huawei.com \
--cc=donald.c.skidmore@intel.com \
--cc=gregory.v.rose@intel.com \
--cc=jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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).