From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1756119AbbAXB0L (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 23 Jan 2015 20:26:11 -0500
Received: from mail-lb0-f181.google.com ([209.85.217.181]:49063 "EHLO
	mail-lb0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751737AbbAXB0I (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 23 Jan 2015 20:26:08 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <54C2B396.9090106@oracle.com>
References: <cover.1416604491.git.luto@amacapital.net> <7665538633a500255d7da9ca5985547f6a2aa191.1416604491.git.luto@amacapital.net>
 <54C17139.1040706@oracle.com> <CALCETrWEUXHOaG-WzDkteoMP=6=tAvyNLfrbg=Xf8ybvMumAow@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150123180455.GA3192@pd.tnic> <CALCETrXA+OKGfxV9M=1AxvBSBPAt_+VmjDH0A+Rq4Ss+tKmTBw@mail.gmail.com>
 <54C2B396.9090106@oracle.com>
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 17:25:45 -0800
Message-ID: <CALCETrXtA-xbec2oGBXW6KUFMY8v=MN2gS5trn1J221OSDDuJA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] x86, traps: Track entry into and exit from IST context
To: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
        =?UTF-8?B?RnLDqWTDqXJpYyBXZWlzYmVja2Vy?= <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com> wrote:
> On 01/23/2015 01:34 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 09:58:01AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>>> [  543.999079] Call Trace:
>>>>> [  543.999079] dump_stack (lib/dump_stack.c:52)
>>>>> [  543.999079] lockdep_rcu_suspicious (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:4259)
>>>>> [  543.999079] atomic_notifier_call_chain (include/linux/rcupdate.h:892 kernel/notifier.c:182 kernel/notifier.c:193)
>>>>> [  543.999079] ? atomic_notifier_call_chain (kernel/notifier.c:192)
>>>>> [  543.999079] notify_die (kernel/notifier.c:538)
>>>>> [  543.999079] ? atomic_notifier_call_chain (kernel/notifier.c:538)
>>>>> [  543.999079] ? debug_smp_processor_id (lib/smp_processor_id.c:57)
>>>>> [  543.999079] do_debug (arch/x86/kernel/traps.c:652)
>>>>> [  543.999079] ? trace_hardirqs_on (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2609)
>>>>> [  543.999079] ? do_int3 (arch/x86/kernel/traps.c:610)
>>>>> [  543.999079] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2554 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2601)
>>>>> [  543.999079] debug (arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S:1310)
>>>>
>>>> I don't know how to read this stack trace.  Are we in do_int3,
>>>> do_debug, or both?  I didn't change do_debug at all.
>>>
>>> It looks like we're in do_debug. do_int3 is only on the stack but not
>>> part of the current frame if I can trust the '?' ...
>>>
>>
>> It's possible that an int3 happened and I did something wrong on
>> return that caused a subsequent do_debug to screw up, but I don't see
>> how my patch would have caused that.
>>
>> Were there any earlier log messages?
>
> Nope, nothing odd before or after.

Trinity just survived for a decent amount of time for me with my
patches, other than a bunch of apparently expected OOM kills.  I have
no idea how to tell trinity how much memory to use.

--Andy