linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] kick ksoftirqd more often to please soft lockup detector

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:	Tue, 28 Feb 2012 08:48:38 -0800
From:	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, Lukasz Dorau <lukasz.dorau@...el.com>,
	James Bottomley <JBottomley@...allels.com>,
	Andrzej Jakowski <andrzej.jakowski@...el.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] kick ksoftirqd more often to please soft lockup detector

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
>> BUG: soft lockup - CPU#3 stuck for 22s! [kworker/3:1:78]
>
> So you're stuck in softirq for 22s+, max_restart is 10, this gives that
> on average you spend 2.2s+ per softirq invocation, this is completely
> absolutely bonkers. Softirq handlers should never consume significant
> amount of cpu-time.

I'm not sure whether this was just one __do_softirq() invocation, or
multiple.  I'll see if I can instrument this, but the suspicion is
that max_restart can't help when softirq is constantly re-triggered.
I'll also add the below patch to see if any single invocation is
violating these expectations.

--
Dan
--
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/