linux-kernel - Re: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 15s! [swapper:0]

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20071208194211.GA579@elte.hu>
Date:	Sat, 8 Dec 2007 20:42:11 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Parag Warudkar <parag.warudkar@...il.com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 15s! [swapper:0]


* Parag Warudkar <parag.warudkar@...il.com> wrote:

> Even on 100% idle I get variations that are approx in the same range 
> when not idle. Clocksource is hpet if that matters.  Next I think I 
> will disable CPU_IDLE, Tickless

also try the hpet=disable boot option.

> My ssh connection just died - another lockup in dmesg -
> 
> BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 14s! [sshd:509]

this would suggest that the softlockup watchdog is correct and indeed 
there was some lockup of sorts?

> $> while :; do time usleep 1111111; done
> real    0m1.112s
> real    0m1.385s
> real    0m1.112s
> real    0m1.112s
> real    0m1.279s

this, if done on an idle system, looks anomalous to me. Does 
hpet=disable help?

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/