How do I analyze a soft lockup?
From: Rainer Koenig
Date: Wed Mar 07 2007 - 09:13:08 EST
Hi there,
Environment:
Kernel is 2.6.16.27, arch x86_64 on a Dual Core AMD64 machine with
4 GB of RAM. Also involved is an Areca 1100 SATA RAID controller
with the drives from the Tekram website.
Problem:
We get customer reports that a system stops with the following kernel
messages (as they are submitted to us, we're not able yet to reproduce
the problem in our laboratory :-( )
------------------8<-snip--------------------------------------------
BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#1!
Call Trace:
<IRQ> [<ffffffff8024cd64>] softlockup_tick+0xd3/0xe5
[<ffffffff8023700d>] update_process_times+0x42/0x68
[<ffffffff80215925>] smp_local_timer_interrupt+0x31/0x54
[<ffffffff80215997>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x4f/0x66
[<ffffffff8020a266>] apic_timer_interrupt+0x66/0x70
<EOI> [<ffffffff8020969e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
[<ffffffff8025d643>] __handle_mm_fault+0x256/0x2d9
[<ffffffff8025d640>] __handle_mm_fault+0x253/0x2d9
[<ffffffff8021d5c2>] do_page_fault+0x23f/0x572
[<ffffffff8020969e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
[<ffffffff8020969e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
[<ffffffff8020969e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
[<ffffffff8020969e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
[<ffffffff805c27dd>] error_exit+0x0/0x84
[<ffffffff8020969e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
[<ffffffff80373550>] __put_user_4+0x20/0x30
[<ffffffff802272cb>] schedule_tail+0x81/0x86
[<ffffffff8020958c>] ret_from_fork+0xc/0x25
BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#1!
Call Trace:
<IRQ> [<ffffffff8024cd64>] softlockup_tick+0xd3/0xe5
[<ffffffff8023700d>] update_process_times+0x42/0x68
[<ffffffff80215925>] smp_local_timer_interrupt+0x31/0x54
[<ffffffff80215997>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x4f/0x66
[<ffffffff8020a266>] apic_timer_interrupt+0x66/0x70
<EOI> [<ffffffff8020969e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
[<ffffffff8025d643>] __handle_mm_fault+0x256/0x2d9
[<ffffffff8025d640>] __handle_mm_fault+0x253/0x2d9
[<ffffffff8021d5c2>] do_page_fault+0x23f/0x572
[<ffffffff8020969e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
[<ffffffff8020969e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
[<ffffffff8021d8f2>] do_page_fault+0x56f/0x572
[<ffffffff805c27dd>] error_exit+0x0/0x84
[<ffffffff8020969e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
[<ffffffff80373550>] __put_user_4+0x20/0x30
[<ffffffff802272cb>] schedule_tail+0x81/0x86
[<ffffffff8020958c>] ret_from_fork+0xc/0x25
----------------8<-snip------------------------------------------
The first thing that makes me very suspicious or curious is that the
call stack shows "__handle_mm_fault" twice, but looking at the source
of that function I don't see any recursion that would explain the
double line.
Is there any idea where I can start digging around?
TIA
Rainer
--
Rainer König, Diplom-Infomatiker (FH), Augsubrg, Germany
-
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/