Re: linux-next: Tree for March 25 (Call trace:RCU|workqueues|block|VFS|ext4 related?)

From: Paul E. McKenney
Date: Mon Mar 28 2011 - 00:08:57 EST

Next message: Ingo Molnar: "Re: [GIT PULL] block drivers for 2.6.39-rc"
Previous message: Linus Torvalds: "Re: [Patch] proc: check error pointer returned by m_start()"
In reply to: Sedat Dilek: "Re: linux-next: Tree for March 25 (Call trace: RCU|workqueues|block|VFS|ext4related?)"
Next in thread: Sedat Dilek: "Re: linux-next: Tree for March 25 (Call trace: RCU|workqueues|block|VFS|ext4related?)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 11:48:30PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 02:26:15PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >> On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 7:07 AM, Paul E. McKenney
> >> <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 08:25:29PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> >> On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 03:30:34AM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >> >> > On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 1:09 AM, Paul E. McKenney
> >> >> > <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> > > On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 11:15:22PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >> >
> >> > [ . . . ]
> >> >
> >> >> > >> But then came RCU :-(.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Well, if it turns out to be a problem in RCU I will certainly apologize.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > No, that's not so dramatic.
> >> >> > Dealing with this RCU issue has nice side-effects: I remembered (and
> >> >> > finally did) to use a reduced kernel-config set.
> >> >> > The base for it I created with 'make localmodconfig' and did some
> >> >> > manual fine-tuning afterwards (throw out media, rc, dvd, unneeded FSs,
> >> >> > etc.).
> >> >> > Also, I can use fresh gcc-4.6 (4.6.0-1) from the official Debian repos.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > So, I started building with
> >> >> > "revert-rcu-patches/0001-Revert-rcu-introduce-kfree_rcu.patch".
> >> >> > I will let you know.
> >> >>
> >> >> And please also check for tasks consuming all available CPU.
> >> >
> >> > And I still cannot reproduce with the full RCU stack (but based off of
> >> > 2.6.38 rather than -next). Nevertheless, if you would like to try a
> >> > speculative patch, here you go.
> >>
> >> You are right and my strategy on handling the (possible RCU?) issue is wrong.
> >> Surely, you tested your RCU stuff in your own repo and everything
> >> might be OK on top of stable 2.6.38.
> >> Linux-next gets daily updates from a lot of different trees, so there
> >> might be interferences with other stuff.
> >> Please, understand I am interested in finding out what is the cause
> >> for my issues, my aim is not to blame you.
> >
> > I am not worried about blame, but rather getting the bug fixed. The
> > bug might be in RCU, it might be elsewhere, or it might be a combination
> > of problems in RCU and elsewhere.
> >
> > So the first priority is locating the bug.
> >
> > And that is why I have been asking you over and over to PLEASE take
> > a look at what tasks are consuming CPU while the problem is occuring.
> > The reason that I have been asking over and over is that the symptoms
> > you describe are likely caused by a loop in some kernel code. Yes,
> > there might be other causes, but this is the most likely. Given that
> > TREE_PREEMPT_RCU behaves better than TREE_RCU, it is likely that this
> > loop is in preemptible code with irqs enabled. Therefore, the process
> > accounting code is likely to be able to see the CPU consumption, and
> > you should be able to see it via the "top" or "ps" commands -- or via
> > any number of other tools.
> >
> > For example, if the problem is confined to RCU, you would likely see
> > the "rcuc0" or "rcun0" tasks consuming lots of CPU. This would narrow
> > the problem down to a few tens of lines of code. If the problem was
> > in some other kthread, then identifying the kthread would very likely
> > narrow things down as well.
> >
> > So, please do take a look to see what taks consuming CPU.
> >
> >> As I was wrong and want to be 99.9% sure it is RCU stuff, I reverted
> >> all (18) RCU patches from linux-next (next-20110325) by keeping the
> >> RCU|PREEMPT|HZ settings from last working next-20110323.
> >
> > Makes sense.
> >
> >> $ egrep 'RCU|PREEMPT|_HZ' /boot/config-2.6.38-next20110325-7-686-iniza
> >> # RCU Subsystem
> >> CONFIG_TREE_RCU=y
> >> # CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU is not set
> >> # CONFIG_RCU_TRACE is not set
> >> CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT=32
> >> # CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_EXACT is not set
> >> CONFIG_RCU_FAST_NO_HZ=y
> >> # CONFIG_TREE_RCU_TRACE is not set
> >> CONFIG_PREEMPT_NOTIFIERS=y
> >> CONFIG_NO_HZ=y
> >> # CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE is not set
> >> CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY=y
> >> # CONFIG_PREEMPT is not set
> >> # CONFIG_HZ_100 is not set
> >> CONFIG_HZ_250=y
> >> # CONFIG_HZ_300 is not set
> >> # CONFIG_HZ_1000 is not set
> >> CONFIG_HZ=250
> >> # CONFIG_SPARSE_RCU_POINTER is not set
> >> # CONFIG_RCU_TORTURE_TEST is not set
> >> # CONFIG_RCU_CPU_STALL_DETECTOR is not set
> >>
> >> I will work and stress this kernel before doing any step-by-step
> >> revert of RCU stuff.
> >>
> >> Thanks for your patch, I applied it on top of "naked" next-20110325,
> >> but I still see call-traces.
> >
> > Thank you very much for testing it!
> >
> > I intend to keep that patch, as it should increase robustness in other
> > situations.
> >
> > Thanx, Paul
> >
> >> - Sedat -
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > Thanx, Paul
> >> >
> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >
> >> > rcu: further lower priority in rcu_yield()
> >> >
> >> > Although rcu_yield() dropped from real-time to normal priority, there
> >> > is always the possibility that the competing tasks have been niced.
> >> > So nice to 19 in rcu_yield() to help ensure that other tasks have a
> >> > better chance of running.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
> >> > index 759f54b..5477764 100644
> >> > --- a/kernel/rcutree.c
> >> > +++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
> >> > @@ -1492,6 +1492,7 @@ static void rcu_yield(void (*f)(unsigned long), unsigned long arg)
> >> > mod_timer(&yield_timer, jiffies + 2);
> >> > sp.sched_priority = 0;
> >> > sched_setscheduler_nocheck(current, SCHED_NORMAL, &sp);
> >> > + set_user_nice(current, 19);
> >> > schedule();
> >> > sp.sched_priority = RCU_KTHREAD_PRIO;
> >> > sched_setscheduler_nocheck(current, SCHED_FIFO, &sp);
>
> Sorry, my attempt was to identify and isolate the culprit commit.
>
> Reverting all RCU patches resulted in a stable system, the following 8
> kernels with reduced k-config setup where all built using this kernel.
>
> All kernels used TREE_RCU (see above), I did not change it (no
> mixing/switching to PREEMPT and TREE_PREEMPT_RCU).
> ( I doubt that TREE_PREEMPT_RCU was some kind of more stable here. )
>
> The culprit commit is bc56163ebd4580199ac7e63f5e160bf139ba0dd6 (from
> rcu/next GIT tree):
> "rcu: move TREE_RCU from softirq to kthread"

OK, please accept my apologies for your lost weekend. And thank you for
testing this.

> I can do parallelly a tar job, open 20 tabs in firefox and run a flash
> video in one of them (I did this several times).

How many files in the tar job? Is this creating a tar archive, expanding
it, or both?

Do you have a script for this? Are all of these running at normal
priority, or are some of them running at real-time priority?

> [ setup.log ]
> ...
> (+) OK revert-rcu-patches/0001-Revert-rcu-introduce-kfree_rcu.patch
> (+) OK revert-rcu-patches/0002-Revert-rcu-fix-spelling.patch
> (+) OK revert-rcu-patches/0003-Revert-rcu-fix-rcu_cpu_kthread_task-synchronization.patch
> (+) OK revert-rcu-patches/0004-Revert-rcu-call-__rcu_read_unlock-in-exit_rcu-for-tr.patch
> (+) OK revert-rcu-patches/0005-Revert-rcu-Converge-TINY_RCU-expedited-and-normal-bo.patch
> (+) OK revert-rcu-patches/0006-Revert-rcu-remove-useless-boosted_this_gp-field.patch
> (+) OK revert-rcu-patches/0007-Revert-rcu-code-cleanups-in-TINY_RCU-priority-boosti.patch
> (+) OK revert-rcu-patches/0008-Revert-rcu-Switch-to-this_cpu-primitives.patch
> (+) OK revert-rcu-patches/0009-Revert-rcu-Use-WARN_ON_ONCE-for-DEBUG_OBJECTS_RCU_HE.patch
> (+) OK revert-rcu-patches/0010-Revert-rcu-Enable-DEBUG_OBJECTS_RCU_HEAD-from-PREEMP.patch
> (+) OK revert-rcu-patches/0011-Revert-rcu-Add-boosting-to-TREE_PREEMPT_RCU-tracing.patch
> (+) OK revert-rcu-patches/0012-Revert-rcu-eliminate-unused-boosting-statistics.patch
> (+) OK revert-rcu-patches/0013-Revert-rcu-priority-boosting-for-TREE_PREEMPT_RCU.patch
> (+) OK revert-rcu-patches/0014-Revert-rcu-move-TREE_RCU-from-softirq-to-kthread.patch
> ...
>
> Hope this helps to narrow down the problem.
>
> As I kept all kernels I can have a look at the tasks consuming high
> CPU usage tomorrow.

Could you please?

Also, could you please mount debugfs and list out the files in the
"rcu" directory? The "ql=" value from the "rcu/rcudata" file is of
particular interest.

Thanx, Paul
--
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/

Next message: Ingo Molnar: "Re: [GIT PULL] block drivers for 2.6.39-rc"
Previous message: Linus Torvalds: "Re: [Patch] proc: check error pointer returned by m_start()"
In reply to: Sedat Dilek: "Re: linux-next: Tree for March 25 (Call trace: RCU|workqueues|block|VFS|ext4related?)"
Next in thread: Sedat Dilek: "Re: linux-next: Tree for March 25 (Call trace: RCU|workqueues|block|VFS|ext4related?)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]