From: "Ryan Hope" <rmh3093@gmail.com>
To: "Nick Piggin" <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: "Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-mm@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] Lockless patches cause hardlock under heavy IO
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 10:52:38 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48f7fe350806190752h5bde0c80mb048d2456bd65be2@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200806191819.31968.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
The reason for applying these patches was because users of my patchset
have been wanting me to include lockless again. It was pretty popular
among the users but we removed it because it would cause hardlocks. I
though I would try it out again now that its in -mm.
I guess I could start reverting patches and see if the issue goes away.
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 4:19 AM, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> On Thursday 19 June 2008 18:12, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Wed, 2008-06-18 at 17:15 -0400, Ryan Hope wrote:
>> > I applied the following patches from 2.6-26-rc5-mm3 to 2.6.26-rc6 and
>> > they caused a hardlock under heavy IO:
>>
>> What kind of machine, how much memory, how many spindles, what
>> filesystem and what is heavy load?
>>
>> Furthermore, try the NMI watchdog with serial/net-console to capture its
>> output.
>
>
> Good suggestions. A trace would be really helpful.
>
> As Arjan suggested, debug options especially CONFIG_DEBUG_VM would be
> a good idea to turn on if you haven't already.
>
> BTW. what was the reason for applying those patches? Did you hit the
> problem with -mm also, and hope to narrow it down?
>
>
>> > x86-implement-pte_special.patch
>> > mm-introduce-get_user_pages_fast.patch
>> > mm-introduce-get_user_pages_fast-fix.patch
>> > mm-introduce-get_user_pages_fast-checkpatch-fixes.patch
>> > x86-lockless-get_user_pages_fast.patch
>> > x86-lockless-get_user_pages_fast-checkpatch-fixes.patch
>> > x86-lockless-get_user_pages_fast-fix.patch
>> > x86-lockless-get_user_pages_fast-fix-2.patch
>> > x86-lockless-get_user_pages_fast-fix-2-fix-fix.patch
>> > x86-lockless-get_user_pages_fast-fix-warning.patch
>> > dio-use-get_user_pages_fast.patch
>> > splice-use-get_user_pages_fast.patch
>> > x86-support-1gb-hugepages-with-get_user_pages_lockless.patch
>> > #
>> > mm-readahead-scan-lockless.patch
>> > radix-tree-add-gang_lookup_slot-gang_lookup_slot_tag.patch
>> > #mm-speculative-page-references.patch: clameter saw bustage
>> > mm-speculative-page-references.patch
>> > mm-speculative-page-references-fix.patch
>> > mm-speculative-page-references-fix-fix.patch
>> > mm-speculative-page-references-hugh-fix3.patch
>> > mm-lockless-pagecache.patch
>> > mm-spinlock-tree_lock.patch
>> > powerpc-implement-pte_special.patch
>> >
>> > I am on an x86_64. I dont know what other info you need...
>
> Can you isolate it to one of the two groups of patches? I suspect it
> might be the latter so you might try that first -- this version of
> speculative page references is very nice in theory but it is a little
> more complex to implement the slowpaths so it could be an error there.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-19 14:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-18 21:15 Ryan Hope
2008-06-18 21:28 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-06-19 14:45 ` Ryan Hope
2008-06-20 0:05 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-06-19 8:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-19 8:19 ` Nick Piggin
2008-06-19 14:52 ` Ryan Hope [this message]
2008-06-19 20:31 ` Ryan Hope
2008-06-20 14:33 ` Ryan Hope
2008-06-22 14:37 ` Ryan Hope
2008-06-22 15:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-22 15:18 ` Ryan Hope
2008-06-23 2:29 ` Nick Piggin
2008-06-23 3:51 ` Ryan Hope
2008-06-23 3:56 ` Nick Piggin
2008-06-23 11:54 ` Nick Piggin
2008-06-23 13:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-06-24 0:13 ` Nick Piggin
2008-06-24 15:12 ` Ryan Hope
2008-06-24 15:32 ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-06-24 15:57 ` Ryan Hope
2008-06-24 16:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-06-24 16:23 ` Ryan Hope
2008-06-24 18:01 ` Ryan Hope
2008-06-23 23:48 ` Zan Lynx
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=48f7fe350806190752h5bde0c80mb048d2456bd65be2@mail.gmail.com \
--to=rmh3093@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®