[patch 1/2] Ignore stolen time in the softlockup watchdog

From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Date: Tue Mar 27 2007 - 01:49:33 EST


The softlockup watchdog is currently a nuisance in a virtual machine,
since the whole system could have the CPU stolen from it for a long
period of time. While it would be unlikely for a guest domain to be
denied timer interrupts for over 10s, it could happen and any softlockup
message would be completely spurious.

Earlier I proposed that sched_clock() return time in unstolen
nanoseconds, which is how Xen and VMI currently implement it. If the
softlockup watchdog uses sched_clock() to measure time, it would
automatically ignore stolen time, and therefore only report when the
guest itself locked up. When running native, sched_clock() returns
real-time nanoseconds, so the behaviour would be unchanged.

Note that sched_clock() used this way is inherently per-cpu, so this
patch makes sure that the per-processor watchdog thread initialized
its own timestamp.

Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: john stultz <johnstul@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Zachary Amsden <zach@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Dan Hecht <dhecht@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Chris Lalancette <clalance@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Rick Lindsley <ricklind@xxxxxxxxxx>

---
kernel/softlockup.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

===================================================================
--- a/kernel/softlockup.c
+++ b/kernel/softlockup.c
@@ -17,8 +17,8 @@

static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(print_lock);

-static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, touch_timestamp);
-static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, print_timestamp);
+static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long long, touch_timestamp);
+static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long long, print_timestamp);
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct task_struct *, watchdog_task);

static int did_panic = 0;
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ static struct notifier_block panic_block

void touch_softlockup_watchdog(void)
{
- __raw_get_cpu_var(touch_timestamp) = jiffies;
+ __raw_get_cpu_var(touch_timestamp) = sched_clock();
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(touch_softlockup_watchdog);

@@ -48,10 +48,15 @@ void softlockup_tick(void)
void softlockup_tick(void)
{
int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
- unsigned long touch_timestamp = per_cpu(touch_timestamp, this_cpu);
+ unsigned long long touch_timestamp = per_cpu(touch_timestamp, this_cpu);
+ unsigned long long now;

- /* prevent double reports: */
- if (per_cpu(print_timestamp, this_cpu) == touch_timestamp ||
+ /* watchdog task hasn't updated timestamp yet */
+ if (touch_timestamp == 0)
+ return;
+
+ /* report at most once a second */
+ if (per_cpu(print_timestamp, this_cpu) < (touch_timestamp + NSEC_PER_SEC) ||
did_panic ||
!per_cpu(watchdog_task, this_cpu))
return;
@@ -62,12 +67,14 @@ void softlockup_tick(void)
return;
}

+ now = sched_clock();
+
/* Wake up the high-prio watchdog task every second: */
- if (time_after(jiffies, touch_timestamp + HZ))
+ if (now > (touch_timestamp + NSEC_PER_SEC))
wake_up_process(per_cpu(watchdog_task, this_cpu));

/* Warn about unreasonable 10+ seconds delays: */
- if (time_after(jiffies, touch_timestamp + 10*HZ)) {
+ if (now > (touch_timestamp + 10ull*NSEC_PER_SEC)) {
per_cpu(print_timestamp, this_cpu) = touch_timestamp;

spin_lock(&print_lock);
@@ -87,6 +94,9 @@ static int watchdog(void * __bind_cpu)

sched_setscheduler(current, SCHED_FIFO, &param);
current->flags |= PF_NOFREEZE;
+
+ /* initialize timestamp */
+ touch_softlockup_watchdog();

/*
* Run briefly once per second to reset the softlockup timestamp.
@@ -120,7 +130,7 @@ cpu_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb,
printk("watchdog for %i failed\n", hotcpu);
return NOTIFY_BAD;
}
- per_cpu(touch_timestamp, hotcpu) = jiffies;
+ per_cpu(touch_timestamp, hotcpu) = 0;
per_cpu(watchdog_task, hotcpu) = p;
kthread_bind(p, hotcpu);
break;

--

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/