[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110724232721.GA19839@bloggs.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 09:27:21 +1000
From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
To: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Cc: Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: perf PPC: kernel panic with callchains and context switch events
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 03:57:51PM -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> I am hoping someone familiar with PPC can help understand a panic that
> is generated when capturing callchains with context switch events.
>
> Call trace is below. The short of it is that walking the callchain
> generates a page fault. To handle the page fault the mmap_sem is needed,
> but it is currently held by setup_arg_pages. setup_arg_pages calls
> shift_arg_pages with the mmap_sem held. shift_arg_pages then calls
> move_page_tables which has a cond_resched at the top of its for loop. If
> the cond_resched() is removed from move_page_tables everything works
> beautifully - no panics.
>
> So, the question: is it normal for walking the stack to trigger a page
> fault on PPC? The panic is not seen on x86 based systems.
Walking the user stack can certainly generate a page fault; walking
the kernel stack should never generate a page fault. If any page
fault is generated reading the user stack frame, we're supposed to
detect that and fall back to walking the page tables manually (see
read_user_stack_64() in arch/powerpc/kernel/perf_callchain.c). I
think I need to check our __get_user_inatomic() implementation.
I don't think removing the cond_resched() from move_page_tables is the
right answer.
Paul.
--
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