* Re: Bug#855183: linux-image-4.9.0-0.bpo.1-amd64: modprobe intel_rapl_perf stay in uninterruptible sleep [not found] <20170215080829.27308.94177.reportbug@imap.fsv.cvut.cz> @ 2017-02-17 0:49 ` Ben Hutchings 2017-02-17 10:47 ` Thomas Gleixner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Ben Hutchings @ 2017-02-17 0:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: x86; +Cc: Miloslav Hula, 855183, LKML [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3472 bytes --] On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 09:08 +0100, Miloslav Hula wrote: [...] > When I boot the system up, there is a constant load 1.0. I found one > process systemd-udevd in uninterruptible sleep. > Digging in proc/PID/fd I found, this proces usees fd 7 for > intel_rapl_perf.ko > > * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or > ineffective)? > I rmmod intel_rapl_perf, the systemd-udevd process disappeared. I > tried to load intel_rapl_perf manually. > > * What was the outcome of this action? > Now, the modprobe is in uninterruptible sleep [...] Here's a traceback for that: > [ 1090.784109] INFO: task systemd-udevd:1182 blocked for more than 120 seconds. > [ 1090.784167] Not tainted 4.9.0-0.bpo.1-amd64 #1 > [ 1090.784202] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message. > [ 1090.784254] systemd-udevd D 0 1182 1098 0x00000004 > [ 1090.784260] ffffa079b6c9d000 0000000000000000 ffffa089b8ffa0c0 ffffa079b688c140 > [ 1090.784265] ffffa089bf2987c0 ffffc1d3ce12bb30 ffffffff929f536d ffffa089bf3d8828 > [ 1090.784268] ffffc1d3ce12bb60 00000000924b0afe ffffa089bf2987c0 ffffa079b688c140 > [ 1090.784272] Call Trace: > [ 1090.784284] [<ffffffff929f536d>] ? __schedule+0x23d/0x6d0 > [ 1090.784308] [<ffffffffc083e6b0>] ? uncore_cpu_prepare+0x100/0x100 [intel_uncore] > [ 1090.784310] [<ffffffff929f5832>] ? schedule+0x32/0x80 > [ 1090.784316] [<ffffffff929f8d3c>] ? schedule_timeout+0x21c/0x3c0 > [ 1090.784327] [<ffffffff924b1374>] ? enqueue_task_fair+0x74/0x950 > [ 1090.784329] [<ffffffff929f5375>] ? __schedule+0x245/0x6d0 > [ 1090.784336] [<ffffffff9242ed05>] ? sched_clock+0x5/0x10 > [ 1090.784344] [<ffffffffc083e6b0>] ? uncore_cpu_prepare+0x100/0x100 [intel_uncore] > [ 1090.784347] [<ffffffff929f624a>] ? wait_for_completion+0xfa/0x130 > [ 1090.784353] [<ffffffff924a2b60>] ? wake_up_q+0x60/0x60 > [ 1090.784358] [<ffffffff924791b6>] ? cpuhp_issue_call+0x96/0xc0 > [ 1090.784361] [<ffffffff9247946a>] ? __cpuhp_setup_state+0xca/0x200 > [ 1090.784369] [<ffffffffc069d34d>] ? intel_uncore_init+0x1f7/0xeaa [intel_uncore] > [ 1090.784376] [<ffffffffc069d156>] ? uncore_type_init+0x156/0x156 [intel_uncore] > [ 1090.784383] [<ffffffff9240218c>] ? do_one_initcall+0x4c/0x180 > [ 1090.784393] [<ffffffff9257cbaf>] ? do_init_module+0x5a/0x1f1 > [ 1090.784400] [<ffffffff92502729>] ? load_module+0x23c9/0x28f0 > [ 1090.784403] [<ffffffff924fef90>] ? __symbol_put+0x60/0x60 > [ 1090.784411] [<ffffffff92603964>] ? vfs_read+0x114/0x130 > [ 1090.784418] [<ffffffff926a4351>] ? security_capable+0x41/0x60 > [ 1090.784421] [<ffffffff92502e3e>] ? SYSC_finit_module+0x8e/0xe0 > [ 1090.784425] [<ffffffff929fa1bb>] ? system_call_fast_compare_end+0xc/0x9b [...] The CPU is a Broadwell (I don't have more information than that); here's the model information from DMI: > ** Model information > sys_vendor: Supermicro > product_name: X10DRi > product_version: 123456789 > chassis_vendor: Default string > chassis_version: Default string > bios_vendor: American Megatrends Inc. > bios_version: 2.1 > board_vendor: Supermicro > board_name: X10DRi > board_version: 1.02B [...] The full bug report is at <https://bugs.debian.org/855183>, with a little more system information. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature. [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Bug#855183: linux-image-4.9.0-0.bpo.1-amd64: modprobe intel_rapl_perf stay in uninterruptible sleep 2017-02-17 0:49 ` Bug#855183: linux-image-4.9.0-0.bpo.1-amd64: modprobe intel_rapl_perf stay in uninterruptible sleep Ben Hutchings @ 2017-02-17 10:47 ` Thomas Gleixner 2017-02-20 22:34 ` Miloslav Hůla 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2017-02-17 10:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ben Hutchings; +Cc: x86, Miloslav Hula, 855183, LKML, Peter Zijlstra, Kan Liang [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2589 bytes --] On Fri, 17 Feb 2017, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 09:08 +0100, Miloslav Hula wrote: > [...] > > When I boot the system up, there is a constant load 1.0. I found one > > process systemd-udevd in uninterruptible sleep. > > Digging in proc/PID/fd I found, this proces usees fd 7 for > > intel_rapl_perf.ko > > > > * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or > > ineffective)? > > I rmmod intel_rapl_perf, the systemd-udevd process disappeared. I > > tried to load intel_rapl_perf manually. > > > > * What was the outcome of this action? > > Now, the modprobe is in uninterruptible sleep > [...] > > Here's a traceback for that: > > > [ 1090.784260] ffffa079b6c9d000 0000000000000000 ffffa089b8ffa0c0 ffffa079b688c140 > > [ 1090.784265] ffffa089bf2987c0 ffffc1d3ce12bb30 ffffffff929f536d ffffa089bf3d8828 > > [ 1090.784268] ffffc1d3ce12bb60 00000000924b0afe ffffa089bf2987c0 ffffa079b688c140 > > [ 1090.784272] Call Trace: > > [ 1090.784284] [<ffffffff929f536d>] ? __schedule+0x23d/0x6d0 > > [ 1090.784308] [<ffffffffc083e6b0>] ? uncore_cpu_prepare+0x100/0x100 [intel_uncore] > > [ 1090.784310] [<ffffffff929f5832>] ? schedule+0x32/0x80 > > [ 1090.784316] [<ffffffff929f8d3c>] ? schedule_timeout+0x21c/0x3c0 > > [ 1090.784327] [<ffffffff924b1374>] ? enqueue_task_fair+0x74/0x950 > > [ 1090.784329] [<ffffffff929f5375>] ? __schedule+0x245/0x6d0 > > [ 1090.784336] [<ffffffff9242ed05>] ? sched_clock+0x5/0x10 > > [ 1090.784344] [<ffffffffc083e6b0>] ? uncore_cpu_prepare+0x100/0x100 [intel_uncore] > > [ 1090.784347] [<ffffffff929f624a>] ? wait_for_completion+0xfa/0x130 > > [ 1090.784353] [<ffffffff924a2b60>] ? wake_up_q+0x60/0x60 > > [ 1090.784358] [<ffffffff924791b6>] ? cpuhp_issue_call+0x96/0xc0 > > [ 1090.784361] [<ffffffff9247946a>] ? __cpuhp_setup_state+0xca/0x200 > > [ 1090.784369] [<ffffffffc069d34d>] ? intel_uncore_init+0x1f7/0xeaa [intel_uncore] Unfortunately that tells us only that something waits forever, but we don't see the stuff which does not invoke complete(). AFAICT thats a cpuhp thread which should run the cpu starting or online callback. What's really confusing is this information from the bug report: " When I changed: Power technology: - from Energy Efficient - to Custom Energy Performance BIAS Setting: - from Balanced Performance - to Performance problem disappeared. systemd-udevd starts normally, module can be normally rmmod/insmod'ed now, load is 0.07." Miloslav: Is there any chance you can try a 4.10-rc8 kernel on that machine? Thanks, tglx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Bug#855183: linux-image-4.9.0-0.bpo.1-amd64: modprobe intel_rapl_perf stay in uninterruptible sleep 2017-02-17 10:47 ` Thomas Gleixner @ 2017-02-20 22:34 ` Miloslav Hůla 2017-02-20 23:24 ` Thomas Gleixner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Miloslav Hůla @ 2017-02-20 22:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thomas Gleixner, Ben Hutchings Cc: x86, 855183, LKML, Peter Zijlstra, Kan Liang Dne 17.02.2017 v 11:47 Thomas Gleixner napsal(a): > What's really confusing is this information from the bug report: > > " When I changed: > > Power technology: > - from Energy Efficient > - to Custom > > Energy Performance BIAS Setting: > - from Balanced Performance > - to Performance > > problem disappeared. systemd-udevd starts normally, module can be > normally rmmod/insmod'ed now, load is 0.07." > > Miloslav: Is there any chance you can try a 4.10-rc8 kernel on that > machine? I compiled 4.10-rc8 kernel with a stock '/boot/config-4.9.0-0.bpo.1-amd64' config from Debian Jessie backports. Then I reverted BIOS settings to previous state and rebooted the server. Kernel and all modules loaded normally, rmmod/insmod intel_rapl_perf passed normally. Then, without any BIOS change, I rebooted with stock 4.9.0-0.bpo.1-amd64 and suprisingly, everything works, I cannot reproduce it. My knowledge on the field of BIOS are shallow. I don't know what I can do to reproduce the bug now. King redards, Miloslav ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Bug#855183: linux-image-4.9.0-0.bpo.1-amd64: modprobe intel_rapl_perf stay in uninterruptible sleep 2017-02-20 22:34 ` Miloslav Hůla @ 2017-02-20 23:24 ` Thomas Gleixner 2017-02-21 9:10 ` Miloslav Hůla 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2017-02-20 23:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Miloslav Hůla Cc: Ben Hutchings, x86, 855183, LKML, Peter Zijlstra, Kan Liang [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1208 bytes --] On Mon, 20 Feb 2017, Miloslav Hůla wrote: > Dne 17.02.2017 v 11:47 Thomas Gleixner napsal(a): > > What's really confusing is this information from the bug report: > > > > " When I changed: > > > > Power technology: > > - from Energy Efficient > > - to Custom > > > > Energy Performance BIAS Setting: > > - from Balanced Performance > > - to Performance > > > > problem disappeared. systemd-udevd starts normally, module can be > > normally rmmod/insmod'ed now, load is 0.07." > > > > Miloslav: Is there any chance you can try a 4.10-rc8 kernel on that > > machine? > > I compiled 4.10-rc8 kernel with a stock '/boot/config-4.9.0-0.bpo.1-amd64' > config from Debian Jessie backports. Then I reverted BIOS settings to previous > state and rebooted the server. Kernel and all modules loaded normally, > rmmod/insmod intel_rapl_perf passed normally. > > Then, without any BIOS change, I rebooted with stock 4.9.0-0.bpo.1-amd64 and > suprisingly, everything works, I cannot reproduce it. > > My knowledge on the field of BIOS are shallow. I don't know what I can do to > reproduce the bug now. Did you just reboot or go through a cold start? That might make a difference. Thanks, tglx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Bug#855183: linux-image-4.9.0-0.bpo.1-amd64: modprobe intel_rapl_perf stay in uninterruptible sleep 2017-02-20 23:24 ` Thomas Gleixner @ 2017-02-21 9:10 ` Miloslav Hůla 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Miloslav Hůla @ 2017-02-21 9:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Ben Hutchings, x86, 855183, LKML, Peter Zijlstra, Kan Liang Dne 21.02.2017 v 0:24 Thomas Gleixner napsal(a): > On Mon, 20 Feb 2017, Miloslav Hůla wrote: >> Dne 17.02.2017 v 11:47 Thomas Gleixner napsal(a): >>> What's really confusing is this information from the bug report: >>> >>> " When I changed: >>> >>> Power technology: >>> - from Energy Efficient >>> - to Custom >>> >>> Energy Performance BIAS Setting: >>> - from Balanced Performance >>> - to Performance >>> >>> problem disappeared. systemd-udevd starts normally, module can be >>> normally rmmod/insmod'ed now, load is 0.07." >>> >>> Miloslav: Is there any chance you can try a 4.10-rc8 kernel on that >>> machine? >> >> I compiled 4.10-rc8 kernel with a stock '/boot/config-4.9.0-0.bpo.1-amd64' >> config from Debian Jessie backports. Then I reverted BIOS settings to previous >> state and rebooted the server. Kernel and all modules loaded normally, >> rmmod/insmod intel_rapl_perf passed normally. >> >> Then, without any BIOS change, I rebooted with stock 4.9.0-0.bpo.1-amd64 and >> suprisingly, everything works, I cannot reproduce it. >> >> My knowledge on the field of BIOS are shallow. I don't know what I can do to >> reproduce the bug now. > > Did you just reboot or go through a cold start? That might make a difference. Reboot only. I'll test it again in next maintenance window. Regards, Milo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-02-21 9:10 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- [not found] <20170215080829.27308.94177.reportbug@imap.fsv.cvut.cz> 2017-02-17 0:49 ` Bug#855183: linux-image-4.9.0-0.bpo.1-amd64: modprobe intel_rapl_perf stay in uninterruptible sleep Ben Hutchings 2017-02-17 10:47 ` Thomas Gleixner 2017-02-20 22:34 ` Miloslav Hůla 2017-02-20 23:24 ` Thomas Gleixner 2017-02-21 9:10 ` Miloslav Hůla
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.