Re: Suspend resume problem (WAS Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.8.10-rt6)

From: Steven Rostedt
Date: Tue Apr 30 2013 - 14:08:24 EST

On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 19:09 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:

> The next thing that happens is that RCU assumes nobody is doing any
> progress (for almost 28secs) and triggers NMIs & printks to get some
> attention. I have a trace where
> - CPU0: arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace_handler() => printk()
> has "lock" and is spinning for logbuf_lock
> - CPU1: print_cpu_stall() => printk() (spinning for the lock) => NMI =>
> arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace_handler()
> it may have logbuf_lock and is spinning for "lock"
> I can't tell if CPU1 got the logbuf_lock at this time but it seemed that
> it made no progress until I ended it.
> This NMI releated deadlock is a problem which should also trigger
> mainline, right?

Well, yeah, as sending out a NMI stack dump is sorta the last resort,
and is dangerous to do printks from NMI context.

> Now, the time jump on the other hand is the real issue here and is
> RT-only. It looks like we get a big number of timer updates via
> tick_do_update_jiffies64() because according to ktime_get() that much
> time really passed by.

As the NMI dump only happens because of the time jump, which as you
said, is -rt only, I wouldn't say that the NMI deadlock is a mainline

-- 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
Please read the FAQ at