From: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
To: Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com>,
Matthias Hensler <matthias@wspse.de>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
richard kennedy <richard@rsk.demon.co.uk>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: Processes spinning forever, apparently in lock_timer_base()?
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 16:58:15 +0100 (BST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709211623190.16442@blonde.wat.veritas.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070921093914.GB4750@shadowen.org>
On Fri, 21 Sep 2007, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> This sounds an awful lot like the same problem I reported with fsck
> hanging. I believe that Hugh had a candidate patch for that, which was
> related to dirty tracking limits. It seems that that patch tested, and
> acked by Peter. All on lkml under:
>
> 2.6.23-rc6-mm1 -- mkfs stuck in 'D'
You may well be right.
My initial reaction was to point out that my patch was to a
2.6.23-rc6-mm1 implementation detail, whereas this thread is
about a problem seen since 2.6.20 or perhaps earlier.
But once I look harder at it, I wonder what would have kept
2.6.18 to 2.6.23 safe from the same issue: per-cpu deltas from
the global vm stats too low to get synched back to global, yet
adding up to something which misleads balance_dirty_pages into
an indefinite loop e.g. total nr_writeback actually 0, but
appearing more than dirty_thresh in the global approximation.
Certainly my rc6-mm1 patch won't work here, and all it was doing
was apply some safety already added by Peter to one further case.
Looking at the 2.6.18-2.6.23 code, I'm uncertain what to try instead.
There is a refresh_vm_stats function which we could call (then retest
the break condition) just before resorting to congestion_wait. But
the big NUMA people might get very upset with me calling that too
often: causing a thundering herd of bouncing cachelines which that
was all designed to avoid. And it's not obvious to me what condition
to test for dirty_thresh "too low".
I believe Peter gave all this quite a lot of thought when he was
making the rc6-mm1 changes, and I'd rather defer to him for a
suggestion of what best to do in earlier releases. Or maybe he'll
just point out how this couldn't have been a problem before.
Or there is is Richard's patch, which I haven't considered, but
Andrew was not quite satisfied with it - partly because he'd like
to understand how the situation could come about first, perhaps
we have now got an explanation.
(The original bug report was indeed on SMP, but I haven't seen
anyone say that's a necessary condition for the hang: it would
be if this is the issue. And Richard writes at one point of the
system only responding to AltSysRq: that would be surprising for
this issue, though it's possible that a task in balance_dirty_pages
is holding an i_mutex that everybody else comes to need.)
Hugh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-21 16:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-01 22:39 Chuck Ebbert
2007-08-02 10:37 ` richard kennedy
2007-08-03 18:34 ` Andrew Morton
2007-08-04 8:44 ` Matthias Hensler
2007-08-09 9:59 ` Matthias Hensler
2007-08-09 16:55 ` Andrew Morton
2007-08-09 17:37 ` Matthias Hensler
2007-09-20 21:07 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-09-20 21:29 ` Andrew Morton
2007-09-20 22:04 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-09-20 22:36 ` Andrew Morton
2007-09-20 22:44 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-09-21 8:08 ` Matthias Hensler
2007-09-21 8:22 ` Andrew Morton
2007-09-21 10:25 ` richard kennedy
2007-09-21 10:33 ` Andrew Morton
2007-09-21 10:47 ` richard kennedy
2007-09-22 12:08 ` richard kennedy
2007-09-21 9:39 ` Andy Whitcroft
2007-09-21 15:43 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-09-21 15:58 ` Hugh Dickins [this message]
2007-09-21 16:16 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-09-21 18:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-10-29 18:55 ` Bruno Wolff III
2007-08-03 20:14 Oleg Nesterov
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.0709211623190.16442@blonde.wat.veritas.com \
--to=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=apw@shadowen.org \
--cc=cebbert@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthias@wspse.de \
--cc=richard@rsk.demon.co.uk \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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®