Re: frequent softlockups with 3.10rc6.

From: Steven Rostedt
Date: Mon Jun 24 2013 - 13:53:18 EST


On Mon, 2013-06-24 at 19:35 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 06/24, Dave Jones wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 06:04:52PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > >
> > > Could you please do the following:
> > >
> > > 1. # cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing
> > > # echo 0 >> options/function-trace
> > > # echo preemptirqsoff >> current_tracer
> > >
> > > 2. reproduce the lockup again
> > >
> > > 3. show the result of
> > > # cat trace
> >
> > Not sure this is helpful, but..
>
> This makes me think that something is seriously broken.
>
> Or I do not understand this stuff at all. Quite possible too.
> Steven, could you please help?
>
> > # preemptirqsoff latency trace v1.1.5 on 3.10.0-rc7+
> > # --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > # latency: 165015310 us, #4/4, CPU#1 | (M:preempt VP:0, KP:0, SP:0 HP:0 #P:4)
>
> OK, 165015310/1000000 = 165, nice.

9600 baud modem serial console?

>
> > # -----------------
> > # | task: trinity-child1-3173 (uid:1000 nice:19 policy:0 rt_prio:0)
> > # -----------------
> > # => started at: vprintk_emit
> > # => ended at: vprintk_emit
> > #
> > #
> > # _------=> CPU#
> > # / _-----=> irqs-off
> > # | / _----=> need-resched
> > # || / _---=> hardirq/softirq
> > # ||| / _--=> preempt-depth
> > # |||| / delay
> > # cmd pid ||||| time | caller
> > # \ / ||||| \ | /
> > trinity--3173 1dNh1 0us!: console_unlock <-vprintk_emit
> > trinity--3173 1dNh1 165015310us : console_unlock <-vprintk_emit
> > trinity--3173 1dNh1 165015311us+: stop_critical_timings <-vprintk_emit
> > trinity--3173 1dNh1 165015315us : <stack trace>
> > => console_unlock
> > => vprintk_emit
> > => printk
> > => watchdog_timer_fn
>
> But this is already called in the non-preemtible context, how can
> 'started at' blame vprintk_emit?

Well, it looks to really have started with console_unlock() not
vprintk_emit.

>
> > => __run_hrtimer
> > => hrtimer_interrupt
> > => smp_apic_timer_interrupt
> > => apic_timer_interrupt
> > => _raw_spin_lock
>
> This is where start_critical_timing() should be called?
>
> Or by TRACE_IRQS_OFF in apic_timer_interrupt...

Also, what _raw_spin_lock is that. Unless the interrupt triggered at the
start of the completion spin lock (before it disabled interrupts), it
could have happened while spinning on inode_sb_list_lock?

But you are correct, the critical timing should have started with the
entering of smp_apic_timer_interrupt. Did anything re-enable interrupts?


>
> > => sync_inodes_sb
> > => sync_inodes_one_sb
> > => iterate_supers
> > => sys_sync
> > => tracesys
>
> Also. watchdog_timer_fn() calls printk() only if it detects the
> lockup, so I assume you hit another one?

Probably.

-- Steve


--
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/