From: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@online.de>
To: Ken Moffat <zarniwhoop@ntlworld.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 3.13.5 : rm -rf running forever, one cpu at approx 100%
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:26:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1393471595.5519.22.camel@marge.simpson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140227005246.GB10367@milliways>
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 00:52 +0000, Ken Moffat wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Short summary : on 3.13.5, rm -rf of an application source
> directory on an ext4 filesystem sometimes takes forever (probably
> isn't going anywhere), with one CPU pegged at all-but 100% utilization.
>
> I've nearly finished building a new system from source, to check
> various desktop packages in linuxfromscratch. On this build, much of
> it is things I don't normally use and I needed to upgrade my
> buildscripts, so most of it was built in chroot using 3.10.32. But
> late last night I booted the new system using 3.13.5 to finish the
> build. This morning I discovered that rm -rf for the icedtea source
> directory was still running, and had taken over 5 hours of CPU time
> (one CPU seemd to be running at close to 100%, the others had dropped
> to their slowest frequency). That script was running as root (yeah,
> but it's a new system) and it looks as if /etc/passwd~ had got
> trashed, because I could no longer su or login. Not sure if that is
> related, at this stage it might just be a side-effect of my scripts.
>
> Booted another system, chrooted, fixed up passwords. Started
> again after commenting out icedtea - I hadn't intended to build
> what was an old version, I'd just forgotten it was in this script -
> that's why I do things in userspace, not the kernel :-(
>
> Continued with remaining packages, but a couple of hours later I
> saw a similar "one CPU at 100%, rm -rf GConf source taking forever"
> problem. Dumped all the processes with Alt-SysRQ-T [ huge log ] but
> at that point 'rm' was merely 'ready' so I doubt there is anything
> useful to see in the log.
>
> Built 3.13.4, booted to that. So far, everything looks good - but
> I'm now building the _current_ version of icedtea, so if this isn't
> a new 3.13.5 problem I guess I'm fairly likely to see it tomorrow.
>
> Meanwhile, any suggestions about how I can debug this if I hit it
> again, please ?
I would start with strace to see if a task is looping in userspace, then
move on to perf top -g -p <pid> (or perf record/report) to peek at what
it's up to in the kernel. Once you have the where, trace_printk() is
the best thing since sliced bread (which ranks just below printk()).
-Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-27 3:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-27 0:52 Ken Moffat
2014-02-27 1:28 ` Gene Heskett
2014-02-27 1:47 ` Ken Moffat
2014-02-27 1:57 ` Gene Heskett
2014-02-27 3:26 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2014-02-27 3:45 ` Ken Moffat
2014-02-27 4:19 ` Gene Heskett
2014-02-27 4:52 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-02-27 11:30 ` Gene Heskett
2014-03-03 21:16 ` Ken Moffat
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1393471595.5519.22.camel@marge.simpson.net \
--to=bitbucket@online.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zarniwhoop@ntlworld.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®