Re: [PATCH v3 resend] procfs: Improve Scaling in proc

From: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
To: Nathan Zimmer <nzimmer@sgi.com>
Cc: "viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk" <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	"eric.dumazet@gmail.com" <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"linux-next@vger.kernel.org" <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 resend] procfs: Improve Scaling in proc
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2013 15:00:54 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51351996.3070708@wwwdotorg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <74F10842A85F514CA8D8C487E74474BB2D32B909@P-EXMB1-DC21.corp.sgi.com>

On 03/04/2013 02:00 PM, Nathan Zimmer wrote:
> Stephen Warren wrote at Monday, March 04, 2013 2:16 PM:
>> On 02/15/2013 01:47 PM, Nathan Zimmer wrote:
>>> I am currently tracking a hotlock reported by a customer on a large system,
>>> 512 cores.  I am currently running 3.8-rc7 but the issue looks like it has been
>>> this way for a very long time.
>>> The offending lock is proc_dir_entry->pde_unload_lock.
>>>
>>> This patch converts the replaces the lock with the rcu. However the pde_openers
>>> list still is controlled by a spin lock. I tested on a 4096 machine and the lock
>>> doesn't seem hot at least according to perf.
>> 
>> Nathan,
>> 
>> This patch causes RCU errors on my ARM systems (which have 2 or 4 CPUs)
>> during boot; see the log below. Reverting it fixes the problem. Let me
>> know if you need any more information to diagnose the problem. Thanks.
>
> I found and fixed a number of them, with the help of sparse. 
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=136242660212004&w=2
> If there are any I didn't find and fix let me know.

Yes, if I revert the version of this patch that's in next-20130304, and
replace it with V5 that you linked to above, then the problem is no
longer present. Thanks.

>> [ 3.652115] VFS: Mounted root (ext3 filesystem) on device 179:1.
>> [ 3.664856] devtmpfs: mounted
>> [ 3.668877] Freeing init memory: 212K
> ...
>> [ 25.765891] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 1, t=2102 jiffies, g=4294967050, c=4294967049, q=5749)
>> [ 25.777786] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
>> [ 88.815886] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 1, t=8407 jiffies, g=4294967050, c=4294967049, q=5818)
>> [ 88.827777] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
>> [ 151.865886] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 1, t=14712 jiffies, g=4294967050, c=4294967049, q=5869)
>> [ 151.877863] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
>> [ 214.915885] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 1, t=21017 jiffies, g=4294967050, c=4294967049, q=5869)
>> [ 214.927857] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start
>> [ 240.525981] INFO: task mountall:71 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
>> [ 240.532435] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
>> [ 240.541452] INFO: task init:150 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
>> [ 240.547687] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
>> [ 240.556352] INFO: task udevd:151 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
>> [ 240.562623] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
>> [ 240.571262] INFO: task ata_id:197 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
>> [ 240.577662] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
>> [ 277.965881] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: {} (detected by 0, t=27322 jiffies, g=4294967050, c=4294967049, q=5869)
>> [ 277.977860] INFO: Stall ended before state dump start--