linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
	Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] kernel freezes with latest tree
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 17:14:32 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120111161431.GA1233@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1326297936.2442.157.camel@twins>


* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 2012-01-11 at 16:56 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> > Well, what happens if every CPU runs load_balance() and we keep 
> > triggering:
> > 
> >                 if (loops++ > sysctl_sched_nr_migrate) {
> >                         *lb_flags |= LBF_NEED_BREAK;
> >                         break;
> >                 }
> > 
> > in this case load_balance() will do the retry:
> > 
> >                 if (lb_flags & LBF_NEED_BREAK) {
> >                         lb_flags &= ~LBF_NEED_BREAK;
> >                         goto redo;
> >                 }
> > 
> > but the retry starts the loop again:
> > 
> >         list_for_each_entry_safe(p, n, &busiest_cfs_rq->tasks, se.group_node) {
> > 
> > so nobody is able to make progress: livelock/lockup.
> 
> Ah, right! Silly me. One possibility is to rotate that list, except that
> won't work for the cgroup case where we have another iteration.
> 
> OK, here's an updated patch.. 
> 
> ---
> Subject: sched: Limit load-balance retries on lock-break
> From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> Date: Wed Jan 11 13:11:12 CET 2012
> 
> Eric and David reported dead machines and traced it to commit a195f004 ("sched:
> Fix load-balance lock-breaking"), it turns out there's still a
> scenario where we can end up re-trying forever.
> 
> Since there is no strict forward progress guarantee in the
> load-balance iteration we can get stuck re-retrying the same task-set
> over and over.
> 
> Creating a forward progress guarantee with the existing structure is
> somewhat non-trivial, for now simply terminate the retry loop after a
> few tries.
> 
> Reported-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
> Reported-by: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> [eric: logic cleanup]
> Tested-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/n/tip-ya9m8grb9wfc26uqnviq2wjq@git.kernel.org
> ---
>  kernel/sched/fair.c |   10 +++++++---
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Thanks Peter, i'll get this fix to Linus ASAP.

Thanks,

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2012-01-11 16:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-01-10  4:57 [BUG] kernel freezes with latest tree Eric Dumazet
2012-01-10  5:03 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-01-10  8:16   ` Eric Dumazet
2012-01-10 16:13     ` Eric Dumazet
2012-01-10 16:28       ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-10 16:37         ` Eric Dumazet
2012-01-10 16:49           ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-10 16:53             ` Eric Dumazet
2012-01-10 17:00               ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-10 19:32                 ` Ingo Molnar
2012-01-10 22:23                 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-01-10 23:44                   ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-11  6:35                     ` David Ahern
2012-01-11  9:04                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-11 10:28                         ` Eric Dumazet
2012-01-11 11:29                           ` Eric Dumazet
2012-01-11 12:25                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-11 13:24                           ` Eric Dumazet
2012-01-11 15:56                           ` Ingo Molnar
2012-01-11 16:05                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-11 16:14                               ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2012-01-11 16:31                               ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-11 16:58                                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-12  6:17                               ` [tip:sched/urgent] sched: Fix lockup by limiting load-balance retries on lock-break tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2012-01-11  8:22                     ` [BUG] kernel freezes with latest tree Eric Dumazet
2012-01-11 14:20                     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-01-10 16:16     ` Linus Torvalds
2012-01-10 16:33       ` Eric Dumazet

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=20120111161431.GA1233@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).