From: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>
To: <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: <josh@joshtriplett.org>, <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
<mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>, <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu: Fix soft lockup for rcu_nocb_kthread
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 09:13:14 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57AA7FAA.1030801@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160616141920.GO3923@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 2016/6/16 22:19, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 02:09:47PM +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote:
>> On 2016/6/15 23:49, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 03:27:36PM +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote:
>>>> I met this problem when using the Testgine to send package to ixgbevf nic
>>>> by this steps:
>>>> 1. Connect to ixgbevf, and set the speed to 10Gb/s, it could work fine.
>>>> 2. Then use ifconfig to down the nic and up again, loop for several times.
>>>> 3. The system panic by soft lockup.
>>>
>>> Good catch, queued for review and testing. But what .config was your
>>> kernel built with?
>>>
>>
>> I use the redhat7.1 defconfig to build my kernel, and the RCU config is this:
>> 120 #
>> 121 # RCU Subsystem
>> 122 #
>> 123 CONFIG_TREE_RCU=y
>> 124 # CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU is not set
>> 125 CONFIG_RCU_STALL_COMMON=y
>> 126 CONFIG_CONTEXT_TRACKING=y
>> 127 CONFIG_RCU_USER_QS=y
>> 128 # CONFIG_CONTEXT_TRACKING_FORCE is not set
>> 129 CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT=64
>> 130 CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_LEAF=16
>> 131 # CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_EXACT is not set
>> 132 # CONFIG_RCU_FAST_NO_HZ is not set
>> 133 # CONFIG_TREE_RCU_TRACE is not set
>> 134 CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU=y
>> 135 CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU_ALL=y
>> 136 CONFIG_BUILD_BIN2C=y
>
> Thank you! You were running with preemption disabled, so your system
> would indeed be very susceptible to this problem.
>
>>> Also, I did tweak both the commit log and the patch. Your cond_resched()
>>> would prevent soft lockups, but not RCU stalls, so I substituted
>>> cond_resched_rcu_qs(). Please let me know if either of those changes
>>> causes problems at your end.
>>
>> Looks fine to me, I will apply this to my branch and test it, thanks.
>
> Please let me know how it goes!
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
Hi Paul:
It has been a long time after applying this patch, and didn't found any problem, I believe this patch is fine, thanks.
Ding
>> Ding
>>
>>>
>>> Thanx, Paul
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> commit c317cf19b34c0d2787b787c38bd2c8fe433215da
>>> Author: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>
>>> Date: Wed Jun 15 15:27:36 2016 +0800
>>>
>>> rcu: Fix soft lockup for rcu_nocb_kthread
>>>
>>> Carrying out the following steps results in a softlockup in the
>>> RCU callback-offload (rcuo) kthreads:
>>>
>>> 1. Connect to ixgbevf, and set the speed to 10Gb/s.
>>> 2. Use ifconfig to bring the nic up and down repeatedly.
>>>
>>> [ 317.005148] IPv6: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): eth2: link becomes ready
>>> [ 368.106005] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 22s! [rcuos/1:15]
>>> [ 368.106005] Hardware name: Bochs Bochs, BIOS Bochs 01/01/2011
>>> [ 368.106005] task: ffff88057dd8a220 ti: ffff88057dd9c000 task.ti: ffff88057dd9c000
>>> [ 368.106005] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff81579e04>] [<ffffffff81579e04>] fib_table_lookup+0x14/0x390
>>> [ 368.106005] RSP: 0018:ffff88061fc83ce8 EFLAGS: 00000286
>>> [ 368.106005] RAX: 0000000000000001 RBX: 00000000020155c0 RCX: 0000000000000001
>>> [ 368.106005] RDX: ffff88061fc83d50 RSI: ffff88061fc83d70 RDI: ffff880036d11a00
>>> [ 368.106005] RBP: ffff88061fc83d08 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000000
>>> [ 368.106005] R10: ffff880036d11a00 R11: ffffffff819e0900 R12: ffff88061fc83c58
>>> [ 368.106005] R13: ffffffff816154dd R14: ffff88061fc83d08 R15: 00000000020155c0
>>> [ 368.106005] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88061fc80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
>>> [ 368.106005] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
>>> [ 368.106005] CR2: 00007f8c2aee9c40 CR3: 000000057b222000 CR4: 00000000000407e0
>>> [ 368.106005] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
>>> [ 368.106005] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
>>> [ 368.106005] Stack:
>>> [ 368.106005] 00000000010000c0 ffff88057b766000 ffff8802e380b000 ffff88057af03e00
>>> [ 368.106005] ffff88061fc83dc0 ffffffff815349a6 ffff88061fc83d40 ffffffff814ee146
>>> [ 368.106005] ffff8802e380af00 00000000e380af00 ffffffff819e0900 020155c0010000c0
>>> [ 368.106005] Call Trace:
>>> [ 368.106005] <IRQ>
>>> [ 368.106005]
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff815349a6>] ip_route_input_noref+0x516/0xbd0
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff814ee146>] ? skb_release_data+0xd6/0x110
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff814ee20a>] ? kfree_skb+0x3a/0xa0
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff8153698f>] ip_rcv_finish+0x29f/0x350
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff81537034>] ip_rcv+0x234/0x380
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff814fd656>] __netif_receive_skb_core+0x676/0x870
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff814fd868>] __netif_receive_skb+0x18/0x60
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff814fe4de>] process_backlog+0xae/0x180
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff814fdcb2>] net_rx_action+0x152/0x240
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff81077b3f>] __do_softirq+0xef/0x280
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff8161619c>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x30
>>> [ 368.106005] <EOI>
>>> [ 368.106005]
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff81015d95>] do_softirq+0x65/0xa0
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff81077174>] local_bh_enable+0x94/0xa0
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff81114922>] rcu_nocb_kthread+0x232/0x370
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff81098250>] ? wake_up_bit+0x30/0x30
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff811146f0>] ? rcu_start_gp+0x40/0x40
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff8109728f>] kthread+0xcf/0xe0
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff810971c0>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x140/0x140
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff816147d8>] ret_from_fork+0x58/0x90
>>> [ 368.106005] [<ffffffff810971c0>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x140/0x140
>>>
>>> ==================================cut here==============================
>>>
>>> It turns out that the rcuos callback-offload kthread is busy processing
>>> a very large quantity of RCU callbacks, and it is not reliquishing the
>>> CPU while doing so. This commit therefore adds an cond_resched_rcu_qs()
>>> within the loop to allow other tasks to run.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>
>>> [ paulmck: Substituted cond_resched_rcu_qs for cond_resched. ]
>>> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>>
>>> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
>>> index 0082fce402a0..85c5a883c6e3 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
>>> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h
>>> @@ -2173,6 +2173,7 @@ static int rcu_nocb_kthread(void *arg)
>>> cl++;
>>> c++;
>>> local_bh_enable();
>>> + cond_resched_rcu_qs();
>>> list = next;
>>> }
>>> trace_rcu_batch_end(rdp->rsp->name, c, !!list, 0, 0, 1);
>>>
>>>
>>> .
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> .
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-10 1:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-15 7:27 [PATCH] rcu: Fix soft lockup for rcu_nocb_kthread Ding Tianhong
2016-06-15 15:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-06-16 6:09 ` Ding Tianhong
2016-06-16 14:19 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-08-10 1:13 ` Ding Tianhong [this message]
2016-08-10 1:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-18 12:37 ` Ding Tianhong
2016-11-18 12:56 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-11-19 7:17 ` Ding Tianhong
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=57AA7FAA.1030801@huawei.com \
--to=dingtianhong@huawei.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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).