[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1232654237.4885.8.camel@kulgan.wumi.org.au>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 06:27:17 +1030
From: Kevin Shanahan <kmshanah@...b.org.au>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Bug #12465] KVM guests stalling on 2.6.28 (bisected)
On Wed, 2009-01-21 at 16:18 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com> wrote:
> > It means, a scheduling problem. Can you run the latency tracer (which
> > only works with realtime priority), so we can tell if it is (a) kvm
> > failing to wake up the vcpu properly or (b) the scheduler delaying the
> > vcpu from running.
>
> Could we please get an ftrace capture of the incident?
>
> Firstly, it makes sense to simplify the tracing environment as much as
> possible: for example single-CPU traces are much easier to interpret.
>
> Can you reproduce it with just one CPU online? I.e. if you offline all the
> other cores via:
>
> echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/online
>
> [etc.]
>
> and keep CPU#0 only, do the latencies still occur?
>
> If they do still occur, then please do the traces that way.
>
> [ If they do not occur then switch back on all CPUs - we'll sort out the
> traces ;-) ]
>
> Then please build a function tracer kernel, by enabling:
>
> CONFIG_FUNCTION_TRACER=y
> CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER=y
> CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE=y
Looks like the function graph tracer is only in 2.6.29, so I've updated
now to 2.6.29-rc2-00013-gf3b8436.
Again, a control test to make sure the problem still occurs:
--- hermes-old.wumi.org.au ping statistics ---
64 packets transmitted, 64 received, 0% packet loss, time 63080ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.168/479.893/4015.950/894.721 ms, pipe 5
Yes, plenty of delays there. Next, checking if I can reproduce with only
one core online:
echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/online
echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu2/online
echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/online
...
--- hermes-old.wumi.org.au ping statistics ---
900 packets transmitted, 900 received, 0% packet loss, time 900253ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.127/38.937/2082.347/170.348 ms, pipe 3
--- hermes-old.wumi.org.au ping statistics ---
900 packets transmitted, 900 received, 0% packet loss, time 900995ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.127/428.398/17126.227/1634.980 ms, pipe 18
So it looks like I can do the simplified trace. I've run out of time for
that this morning, but I'll spend some time on it over the weekend.
Thanks for the detailed instructions - it doesn't look like it will be
too hard.
Cheers,
Kevin.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists