mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: Can RCU stall lead to hard lockups?
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2018 12:50:32 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180203205032.GN3617@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180202234430.GA25611@mail.hallyn.com>

On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 05:44:30PM -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Paul E. McKenney (paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com):
> > On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 06:11:14AM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > Hello, Paul.
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 08:24:25PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > I don't know the RCU code at all but it *looks* like the first CPU is
> > > > > taking a sweet while flushing printk buffer while holding a lock (the
> > > > > console is IPMI serial console, which faithfully emulates 115200 baud
> > > > > rate), and everyone else seems stuck waiting for that spinlock in
> > > > > rcu_check_callbacks().
> > > > > 
> > > > > Does this sound possible?
> > > > 
> > > > 115200 baud?  Ouch!!!  That -will- result in trouble from console
> > > > printing, and often also in RCU CPU stall warnings.
> > > 
> > > It could even be slower than 115200, and we occassionally see RCU
> > > stall warnings caused by printk storms, for example, while the kernel
> > > is trying to dump a lot of info after an OOM.  That's an issue we
> > > probably want to improve from printk side; however, they don't usually
> > > lead to NMI hard lockup detector kicking in and crashing the machine,
> > > which is the peculiarity here.
> > > 
> > > Hmmm... show_state_filter(), the function which dumps all task
> > > backtraces, share a similar problem and it avoids it by explicitly
> > > calling touch_nmi_watchdog().  Maybe we can do something like the
> > > following from RCU too?
> > 
> > If this fixes things for you, I would welcome such a patch.
> 
> Hi - would this also be relevant to 4.9-stable and 4.4-stable, or
> has something elsewhere changed after 4.9 that actually triggers this?

As far as I can tell, slow console lines have been prone to RCU CPU stall
warnings for a very long time.

							Thanx, Paul

> thanks,
> -serge
> 
> > 							Thanx, Paul
> > 
> > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> > > index db85ca3..3c4c4d3 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
> > > @@ -561,8 +561,14 @@ static void rcu_print_detail_task_stall_rnp(struct rcu_node *rnp)
> > >  	}
> > >  	t = list_entry(rnp->gp_tasks->prev,
> > >  		       struct task_struct, rcu_node_entry);
> > > -	list_for_each_entry_continue(t, &rnp->blkd_tasks, rcu_node_entry)
> > > +	list_for_each_entry_continue(t, &rnp->blkd_tasks, rcu_node_entry) {
> > > +		touch_nmi_watchdog();
> > > +		/*
> > > +		 * We could be printing a lot of these messages while
> > > +		 * holding a spinlock.  Avoid triggering hard lockup.
> > > +		 */
> > >  		sched_show_task(t);
> > > +	}
> > >  	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore_rcu_node(rnp, flags);
> > >  }
> > > 
> > > @@ -1678,6 +1684,12 @@ static void print_cpu_stall_info(struct rcu_state *rsp, int cpu)
> > >  	char *ticks_title;
> > >  	unsigned long ticks_value;
> > > 
> > > +	/*
> > > +	 * We could be printing a lot of these messages while holding a
> > > +	 * spinlock.  Avoid triggering hard lockup.
> > > +	 */
> > > +	touch_nmi_watchdog();
> > > +
> > >  	if (rsp->gpnum == rdp->gpnum) {
> > >  		ticks_title = "ticks this GP";
> > >  		ticks_value = rdp->ticks_this_gp;
> > > 
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2018-02-03 20:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-01-09  3:52 Tejun Heo
2018-01-09  4:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-01-09 14:11   ` Tejun Heo
2018-01-09 15:22     ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-01-09 18:47       ` [PATCH] RCU: Call touch_nmi_watchdog() while printing stall warnings Tejun Heo
2018-01-09 18:52         ` [PATCH trivial-v2] " Tejun Heo
2018-01-09 20:05           ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-01-10  5:34         ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-01-10 14:57           ` Tejun Heo
2018-01-11  0:45             ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-02-02 23:44       ` Can RCU stall lead to hard lockups? Serge E. Hallyn
2018-02-03 20:50         ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2018-02-07  2:33           ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-02-07  2:53             ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-07  2:55               ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-02-07  3:16                 ` Paul E. McKenney

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=20180203205032.GN3617@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=serge@hallyn.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    /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

Powered by JetHome