Re: lockups shortly after booting in current git.
From: Dave Jones
Date: Thu Mar 29 2012 - 16:26:24 EST
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 01:10:21PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > sysrq-p looks kinda boring. I couldn't get sysrq-l to coincide
> > with kworker running.
> Yeah, none of that looks interesting.
> Apparently kworker isn't actually using all CPU after all.
Ok, so progress, kinda. I can now reproduce it in 10 minutes
just by starting a make -j8 on the kernel, and running fsx in parallel
on the same ssd.
While that's building, I'll click around in firefox, and after a few
minutes, it comes to a standstill. At that point, I can't spawn
kworker does seem to be a red herring. This time, I'm looking at top and..
top - 16:24:02 up 16 min, 10 users, load average: 11.27, 9.62, 5.58
Tasks: 164 total, 1 running, 163 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 0.2%us, 3.3%sy, 0.0%ni, 49.1%id, 47.4%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st
Mem: 3991860k total, 1832652k used, 2159208k free, 67320k buffers
Swap: 6109180k total, 0k used, 6109180k free, 696908k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
1082 root 20 0 175m 20m 9.9m S 4.6 0.5 1:18.24 Xorg
2918 davej 20 0 15260 1404 1008 R 1.6 0.0 0:17.23 top
7 root -2 0 0 0 0 S 0.3 0.0 0:03.38 rcuc/0
Pretty dull. Loadavg is consistent at 11, nothing is making forward progress,
and make/fsx are ignoring ctrl-c/ctrl-z
I had a perf top running in another window. It took doesn't show anything exciting..
8.83% [kernel] [k] read_hpet
8.26% [kernel] [k] lock_is_held
5.53% [kernel] [k] __lock_acquire
4.71% [kernel] [k] sub_preempt_count
4.32% [kernel] [k] add_preempt_count
3.90% [kernel] [k] debug_smp_processor_id
3.86% [kernel] [k] __module_address
3.24% [kernel] [k] sched_clock_local
2.92% [kernel] [k] lock_release
2.91% [kernel] [k] rcu_lockdep_current_cpu_online
2.22% [iwlwifi] [k] iwl_trans_pcie_read32
1.92% [kernel] [k] lock_acquired
1.84% [kernel] [k] match_held_lock
1.78% [kernel] [k] rcu_is_cpu_idle
1.76% [kernel] [k] trace_hardirqs_off_caller
1.72% [kernel] [k] debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled
1.70% [kernel] [k] native_read_tsc
1.62% [kernel] [k] local_clock
I'll go back to trying the bisect now that I know how to reproduce it quickly.
Do you think it might be worth restricting the bisect to fs/ ?
Or shall I just do the whole tree bisect from 3.3 ?
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/