Re: Plans for Onezonelist patch series ???
From: Mel Gorman
Date: Thu Nov 08 2007 - 15:06:23 EST
On (08/11/07 10:43), Christoph Lameter didst pronounce:
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2007, Mel Gorman wrote:
>
> > There was two bugs that were resolved but I didn't repost after that as
> > mainline + -mm had gone to hell in a hand-basket and I didn't want to
> > add to the mess.
>
> Hell? I must have missed it.
>
Some time after rc1, things appeared in a mess - at least I didn't have
much luck figuring out what was going on when I looked. Admittedly, being
very ill at the time I didn't spend much effort on it. Either way things
were churning enough that there seemed to be enough going on without adding
one-zonelist to the mix.
I've rebased the patches to mm-broken-out-2007-11-06-02-32. However, the
vanilla -mm and the one with onezonelist applied are locking up in the
same manner. I'm way too behind at the moment to guess if it is a new bug
or reported already. At best, I can say the patches are not making things
any worse :) I'll go through the archives in the morning and do a bit more
testing to see what happens.
In case this is familiar to people, the lockup I see is;
[ 115.548908] BUG: spinlock bad magic on CPU#0, sshd/2752
[ 115.611371] lock: c20029c8, .magic: ffffffff, .owner: <none>/-1, .owner_cpu: -1066669496
[ 115.709027] [<c010526a>] show_trace_log_lvl+0x1a/0x30
[ 115.770560] [<c0105c02>] show_trace+0x12/0x20
[ 115.823787] [<c0105d16>] dump_stack+0x16/0x20
[ 115.877011] [<c022c226>] spin_bug+0x96/0xf0
[ 115.928172] [<c022c429>] _raw_spin_lock+0x69/0x140
[ 115.986580] [<c033f05f>] _spin_lock+0x4f/0x60
[ 116.039809] [<c0224bae>] kobject_add+0x4e/0x1a0
[ 116.095112] [<c01314b4>] uids_user_create+0x54/0x80
[ 116.154555] [<c01318e2>] alloc_uid+0xd2/0x150
[ 116.207784] [<c01356db>] set_user+0x2b/0xb0
[ 116.258951] [<c01373c1>] sys_setreuid+0x141/0x150
[ 116.316305] [<c010429e>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
[ 116.369544] =======================
[ 127.680346] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 11s! [sshd:2752]
[ 127.750987]
[ 127.768781] Pid: 2752, comm: sshd Not tainted (2.6.24-rc1-mm1 #1)
[ 127.841498] EIP: 0060:[<c02298c1>] EFLAGS: 00000246 CPU: 0
[ 127.906948] EIP is at delay_tsc+0x1/0x20
[ 127.953754] EAX: 00000001 EBX: c20029c8 ECX: b0953e83 EDX: 2b35cb6d
[ 128.028533] ESI: 04b81d83 EDI: 00000000 EBP: c30f1ec4 ESP: c30f1ebc
[ 128.103305] DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0033 SS: 0068
[ 128.167717] CR0: 80050033 CR2: b7e45544 CR3: 02153000 CR4: 00000690
[ 128.242490] DR0: 00000000 DR1: 00000000 DR2: 00000000 DR3: 00000000
[ 128.317253] DR6: ffff0ff0 DR7: 00000400
[ 128.363010] [<c010526a>] show_trace_log_lvl+0x1a/0x30
[ 128.424541] [<c0105c02>] show_trace+0x12/0x20
[ 128.477767] [<c010250c>] show_regs+0x1c/0x20
[ 128.529948] [<c015ab6b>] softlockup_tick+0x11b/0x150
[ 128.590446] [<c0130fb2>] run_local_timers+0x12/0x20
[ 128.649888] [<c0131182>] update_process_times+0x42/0x90
[ 128.713461] [<c01440f5>] tick_periodic+0x25/0x80
[ 128.769812] [<c0144169>] tick_handle_periodic+0x19/0x80
[ 128.833397] [<c0107519>] timer_interrupt+0x49/0x50
[ 128.891802] [<c015aeb8>] handle_IRQ_event+0x28/0x60
[ 128.951246] [<c015c7f8>] handle_level_irq+0x78/0xe0
[ 129.010693] [<c01065f0>] do_IRQ+0x40/0x80
[ 129.059782] [<c0104c5f>] common_interrupt+0x23/0x28
[ 129.119229] [<c022c472>] _raw_spin_lock+0xb2/0x140
[ 129.177635] [<c033f05f>] _spin_lock+0x4f/0x60
[ 129.230851] [<c0224bae>] kobject_add+0x4e/0x1a0
[ 129.286175] [<c01314b4>] uids_user_create+0x54/0x80
[ 129.345598] [<c01318e2>] alloc_uid+0xd2/0x150
[ 129.398830] [<c01356db>] set_user+0x2b/0xb0
[ 129.450005] [<c01373c1>] sys_setreuid+0x141/0x150
[ 129.507380] [<c010429e>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
[ 129.560605] =======================
--
--
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab
-
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/