mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Bjørn Mork" <bjorn@mork.no>
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Norbert Warmuth <nwarmuth@t-online.de>,
	Joseph Salisbury <joseph.salisbury@canonical.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH v3] watchdog: Fix disable/enable regression
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 22:17:42 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <874njh7nd5.fsf@nemi.mork.no> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121219201336.GK88797@redhat.com> (Don Zickus's message of "Wed, 19 Dec 2012 15:13:36 -0500")

Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com> writes:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 08:51:31PM +0100, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>> commit 8d451690 ("watchdog: Fix CPU hotplug regression") cause
>> an oops or hard lockup when doing
>> 
>>  echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/nmi_watchdog
>>  echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/nmi_watchdog
>> 
>> and the kernel is booted with nmi_watchdog=1 (default)
>> 
>> Running laptop-mode-tools and disconnecting/connecting AC power
>> will cause this to trigger, making it a common failure scenario
>> on laptops.
>> 
>> Instead of bailing out of watchdog_disable() when !watchdog_enabled
>> we can initialize the hrtimer regardless of watchdog_enabled status.
>> This makes it safe to call watchdog_disable() in the nmi_watchdog=0
>> case, without the negative effect on the enabled => disabled =>
>> enabled case.
>> 
>> All these tests pass with this patch:
>> - nmi_watchdog=1
>>   echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/nmi_watchdog
>>   echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/nmi_watchdog
>> 
>> - nmi_watchdog=0
>>   echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/online
>> 
>> - nmi_watchdog=0
>>   echo mem > /sys/power/state
>
> What about the opposite cases?  
> nmi_watchdog=1
> echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/online

I don't see why not. But verifying it would be nice.  I thought that it
would be a simple thing to test using qemu-kvm, but it seems that the
CPU hotplugging support there isn't quite ready. The guest just dies
with "Assertion `bus->allow_hotplug' failed."

I'll go digging for alternatives, but if anyone else could verify this
then I'd appreciate it.

> Are we going to leak memory by re-initing hrtimer?  Or is that caught
> somewhere?

There are no allocations in hrtimer_init() AFAICS? It just initializes
the preallocated hrtimer struct.

> Other than that, the patch seems reasonable to me.  Basically just forcing
> the init of hrtimer so there is something to cancel on the disable side.
> Then again, I don't fully understand the original problem.

I believe the original problem was calling hrtimer_cancel on an
uninitialized hrtimer.  That is likely to blow up here:

static inline
void unlock_hrtimer_base(const struct hrtimer *timer, unsigned long *flags)
{
        raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&timer->base->cpu_base->lock, *flags);
}


Note that the lock_hrtimer_base() function protects access to
timer->base with a NULL test.  That should probably be done in unlock as
well, for symmetry?  But this is another issue and not at all urgent.




Bjørn

  reply	other threads:[~2012-12-19 21:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-12-14  9:33 Bisected oops regression between v3.7-rc8 and v3.7: nmi_watchdog Bjørn Mork
2012-12-14  9:34 ` [PATCH] Revert "watchdog: Fix CPU hotplug regression" Bjørn Mork
2012-12-14 13:44 ` [PATCH v2] watchdog: Fix disable/enable regression Bjørn Mork
2012-12-16 19:41 ` Bisected oops regression between v3.7-rc8 and v3.7: nmi_watchdog Maciej Rutecki
2012-12-18  8:13 ` [regression][PATCH v3] watchdog: Fix disable/enable regression Bjørn Mork
2012-12-19 19:51 ` [RESEND][PATCH " Bjørn Mork
2012-12-19 20:13   ` Don Zickus
2012-12-19 21:17     ` Bjørn Mork [this message]
2012-12-19 21:44       ` Bjørn Mork
2012-12-20 19:17         ` Don Zickus

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=874njh7nd5.fsf@nemi.mork.no \
    --to=bjorn@mork.no \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
    --cc=joseph.salisbury@canonical.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nwarmuth@t-online.de \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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®