Re: Hard lockups using 3.10.0
From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Thu Jul 11 2013 - 06:53:03 EST
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:07:21PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 11:38:37AM +0200, Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm running 3.10.0 (from openSUSE packages) on an "Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600
> > CPU @ 3.40GHz". I got a hard lockup on one of my CPUs twice, once with
> > backtrace (see attached image). Graphics is the builtin Intel, used with X 7.6
> > and KDE 4.10beta2 (basically current openSUSE 12.3+KDE).
> >
> > I'm not aware that I had done anything special, just "normal" desktop and
> > development usage, but no heavy compile work at the moment the lockups
> > happened.
>
> Hmm, I can see commit_creds() doing some rcu pointers assignment and rcu
> calling into the scheduler which screams about a cpu runqueue of the
> task we're about to reschedule not being locked. Let's add some more
> people who should know better.
Ok, for the other people too lazy to bother finding the picture:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=137353587012001&q=p3
So we bug at:
kernel/sched/core.c:519 assert_raw_spin_locked(&task_rq(p)->lock);
and get there through:
resched_task()
check_preempt_wakeup()
check_preempt_curr()
try_to_wake_up()
autoremove_wake_function()
__call_rcu_nocb_enqueue()
__call_rcu()
commit_creds()
____call_usermodehelper()
ret_from_fork()
That don't make much sense though. Since:
try_to_wake_up()
ttwu_queue()
raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock)
ttwu_do_activate()
ttwu_do_wakeup()
check_preempt_curr()
check_preempt_wakeup()
resched_task(rq->curr)
assert_raw_spin_locked(task_rq(p)->lock)
It would somehow mean that 'task_rq(rq->curr) != rq', that's completely
bonkers, we do after all have rq->lock locked.
I must also say that I've _never_ seen this bug before.
--
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/