All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Guus Sliepen <Guus.Sliepen@astro.su.se>
To: Peter Klotz <peter.klotz99@gmail.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Roman Kononov <kernel@kononov.ftml.net>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: BUG: soft lockup - is this XFS problem?
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 21:29:45 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110714192945.GX18364@sliepen.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E1F2F5D.8060505@gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1444 bytes --]

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 08:03:09PM +0200, Peter Klotz wrote:

> On 07/14/2011 01:23 PM, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> 
> >I'm having a problem with a system having an XFS filesystem on RAID locking up
> >fairly consistently when writing large amounts of data to it, with several
> >kernels, including 2.6.38.2 and 2.6.39.3, on both AMD and Intel multi-core
> >processors. The kernel always logs this several times:
> >
> >BUG: soft lockup - CPU#2 stuck for 67s! [kswapd0:33]
[...]
> This Bugzilla entry documents the XFS bug from 2009 in detail
> including links:
> 
> http://oss.sgi.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=805

Aha, I did not look at that before.

> The problem was finally solved by a patch proposed by Linus. This is
> the reason the original patch developed by Nick never made it into
> the kernel.
> 
> My tests back then showed that both patches fixed the problem.
> 
> It seems you have found a test case where just Nick's patch helps.

Yes. I agree with Linus that the root cause should be fixed, not the symptoms.
I don't have time to dive in the kernel code myself, but I do have several
nearly identical machines where I can test things on. I will be happy to test
out patches and/or different kernel versions or kernel configurations, and I
can provide dmesg output and perhaps other information if necessary.

-- 
Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
Guus Sliepen <Guus.Sliepen@astro.su.se>

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Guus Sliepen <Guus.Sliepen@astro.su.se>
To: Peter Klotz <peter.klotz99@gmail.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	xfs@oss.sgi.com, Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>,
	Roman Kononov <kernel@kononov.ftml.net>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BUG: soft lockup - is this XFS problem?
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 21:29:45 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110714192945.GX18364@sliepen.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E1F2F5D.8060505@gmail.com>


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1444 bytes --]

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 08:03:09PM +0200, Peter Klotz wrote:

> On 07/14/2011 01:23 PM, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> 
> >I'm having a problem with a system having an XFS filesystem on RAID locking up
> >fairly consistently when writing large amounts of data to it, with several
> >kernels, including 2.6.38.2 and 2.6.39.3, on both AMD and Intel multi-core
> >processors. The kernel always logs this several times:
> >
> >BUG: soft lockup - CPU#2 stuck for 67s! [kswapd0:33]
[...]
> This Bugzilla entry documents the XFS bug from 2009 in detail
> including links:
> 
> http://oss.sgi.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=805

Aha, I did not look at that before.

> The problem was finally solved by a patch proposed by Linus. This is
> the reason the original patch developed by Nick never made it into
> the kernel.
> 
> My tests back then showed that both patches fixed the problem.
> 
> It seems you have found a test case where just Nick's patch helps.

Yes. I agree with Linus that the root cause should be fixed, not the symptoms.
I don't have time to dive in the kernel code myself, but I do have several
nearly identical machines where I can test things on. I will be happy to test
out patches and/or different kernel versions or kernel configurations, and I
can provide dmesg output and perhaps other information if necessary.

-- 
Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
Guus Sliepen <Guus.Sliepen@astro.su.se>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 121 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2011-07-14 19:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 74+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-12-19  6:59 BUG: soft lockup - is this XFS problem? Roman Kononov
2008-12-23 17:12 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-12-23 17:12   ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-12-30  4:23   ` Nick Piggin
2008-12-30  4:23     ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-03 21:44     ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-01-03 21:44       ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-01-05  1:48       ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05  1:48         ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05  4:19         ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05  4:19           ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05  6:48           ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05  6:48             ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 14:25             ` Roman Kononov
2009-01-05 14:25               ` Roman Kononov
2009-01-05 16:21             ` Peter Klotz
2009-01-05 16:21               ` Peter Klotz
2009-01-05 16:41               ` [patch] mm: fix lockless pagecache reordering bug (was Re: BUG: soft lockup - is this XFS problem?) Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 16:41                 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 16:41                 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 17:30                 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 17:30                   ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 17:30                   ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 18:00                   ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 18:00                     ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 18:00                     ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 18:44                     ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 18:44                       ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 18:44                       ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 19:39                       ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 19:39                         ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 19:39                         ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-06 17:17                         ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-06 17:17                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-06 17:17                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 20:12                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 20:12                         ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 20:12                         ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 20:39                         ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 20:39                           ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 20:39                           ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-05 21:57                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 21:57                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 21:57                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-06  2:05                             ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-06  2:05                               ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-06  2:05                               ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-06  2:23                               ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-06  2:23                                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-06  2:23                                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-06  2:29                               ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-06  2:29                                 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-06  2:29                                 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-06  8:38                               ` Peter Klotz
2009-01-06  8:38                                 ` Peter Klotz
2009-01-06  8:38                                 ` Peter Klotz
2009-01-06  8:43                                 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-06  8:43                                   ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-06  8:43                                   ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-06 16:16                               ` Roman Kononov
2009-01-06 16:16                                 ` Roman Kononov
2009-01-06 16:16                                 ` Roman Kononov
2009-01-05 21:04                         ` [patch] mm: fix lockless pagecache reordering bug (was Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-05 21:04                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-05 21:04                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-05 21:58                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 21:58                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 21:58                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-14 11:23             ` BUG: soft lockup - is this XFS problem? Guus Sliepen
2011-07-14 11:23               ` Guus Sliepen
2011-07-14 18:03               ` Peter Klotz
2011-07-14 18:03                 ` Peter Klotz
2011-07-14 19:29                 ` Guus Sliepen [this message]
2011-07-14 19:29                   ` Guus Sliepen

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=20110714192945.GX18364@sliepen.org \
    --to=guus.sliepen@astro.su.se \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=kernel@kononov.ftml.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=npiggin@kernel.dk \
    --cc=peter.klotz99@gmail.com \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.