linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] [GIT PULL] updates for tip/tracing/ftrace

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]

Date:	Sat, 21 Mar 2009 13:44:07 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] [GIT PULL] updates for tip/tracing/ftrace


On Sat, 21 Mar 2009, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Testing tracer sched_switch: PASSED
> > initcall init_sched_switch_trace+0x0/0x12 returned 0 after 99609 usecs
> > calling  init_stack_trace+0x0/0x12 @ 1
> > Testing tracer sysprof: .. no entries found ..FAILED!
> > initcall init_stack_trace+0x0/0x12 returned -1 after 101562 usecs
> > initcall init_stack_trace+0x0/0x12 returned with error code -1 
> > calling  init_function_trace+0x0/0x12 @ 1
> > Testing tracer function: PASSED
> > initcall init_function_trace+0x0/0x12 returned 0 after 104492 usecs
> > calling  init_irqsoff_tracer+0x0/0x2c @ 1
> > Testing tracer irqsoff: .. no entries found ..FAILED!
> > Testing tracer preemptoff: .. no entries found ..FAILED!
> > Testing tracer preemptirqsoff: .. no entries found ..FAILED!
> 
> 
> It's strange that the {*}_off tracers have failed.

Does this have your changes in it?  The ones that solved this before.

> 
> 
> > initcall init_irqsoff_tracer+0x0/0x2c returned 0 after 8789 usecs
> > calling  init_wakeup_tracer+0x0/0x58 @ 1
> > Testing tracer wakeup: .. no entries found ..FAILED!
> 
> 
> This one too. (sysprof doesn't count, it fails for some weeks, I think
> it's not a hard deal to fix).
> 
> 
> > initcall init_wakeup_tracer+0x0/0x58 returned -1 after 298828 usecs
> > initcall init_wakeup_tracer+0x0/0x58 returned with error code -1 
> > calling  stack_trace_init+0x0/0xc7 @ 1
> > initcall stack_trace_init+0x0/0xc7 returned 0 after 0 usecs
> > calling  init_mmio_trace+0x0/0x12 @ 1
> > initcall init_mmio_trace+0x0/0x12 returned 0 after 0 usecs
> > calling  init_graph_trace+0x0/0x12 @ 1
> > Testing tracer function_graph: <3>INFO: RCU detected CPU 0 stall (t=4294678940/10000 jiffies)
> > Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.29-rc8-tip-02752-g47b1aea-dirty #3264
> > Call Trace:
> >  <IRQ>  [<ffffffff8020c79d>] return_to_handler+0x0/0x73
> >  [<ffffffff80211150>] print_context_stack+0xa0/0xd3
> >  [<ffffffff8020c79d>] return_to_handler+0x0/0x73
> >  [<ffffffff8020fb26>] dump_trace+0x22d/0x2cc
> >  [<ffffffff8020c79d>] return_to_handler+0x0/0x73
> >  [<ffffffff80211008>] show_trace_log_lvl+0x51/0x5d
> >  [<ffffffff8020c79d>] return_to_handler+0x0/0x73
> >  [<ffffffff80211029>] show_trace+0x15/0x17
> >  [<ffffffff8020c79d>] return_to_handler+0x0/0x73
> >  [<ffffffff802111fa>] dump_stack+0x77/0x81
> >  [<ffffffff8020c79d>] return_to_handler+0x0/0x73
> >  [<ffffffff8029e6dd>] print_cpu_stall+0x40/0xa4
> >  [<ffffffff8020c79d>] return_to_handler+0x0/0x73
> >  [<ffffffff8029e8be>] check_cpu_stall+0x49/0x76
> >  [<ffffffff8020c79d>] return_to_handler+0x0/0x73
> >  [<ffffffff8029e902>] __rcu_pending+0x17/0xfc
> >  [<ffffffff8020c79d>] return_to_handler+0x0/0x73
> >  [<ffffffff8029ea13>] rcu_pending+0x2c/0x5e
> >  [<ffffffff8020c79d>] return_to_handler+0x0/0x73
> >  [<ffffffff8026abef>] update_process_times+0x3c/0x77
> >  [<ffffffff8020c79d>] return_to_handler+0x0/0x73
> >  [<ffffffff802875dd>] tick_periodic+0x6e/0x70
> 
> 
> Still hanging in the timer interrupt.
> I guess it makes the timer interrupt servicing too slow and then
> once it is serviced, another one is raised.
> 
> But the cause is perhaps more complex
> 
> I think you have had too much hanging of this type.
> I'm preparing a fix that checks periodically if the function graph
> tracer is spending too much time in an interrupt.
> 
> I guess I could count the number of function executed between the irq entry
> and its exit.
> 
> That's the best: if we are hanging in an interrupt, it could be whatever
> interrupt and the jiffies could not be progressing so I can't rely
> on time but only on number of functions executed.
> 
> May be 10000 calls is a good threshold before killing the function graph
> inside an interrupt?
> 
> Let's try, I will also provide a way to dump the function graph traces from
> the ring-buffer on the screen, it could help to debug it in this case.

I was thinking the same thing. All you need to do is add a "ftrace_dump()" 
in the print_cpu_stall() function in kernel/rcuclassic.c.

You would need to add "#include <linux/ftrace.h>" too.

/me wonders if we should add ftrace_dump() to kernel.h to remove that 
requirement?

-- Steve

--
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/