linux-kernel - Re: [next-20120823] NOHZ: local_softirq

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1208241738130.2856@ionos>
Date:	Fri, 24 Aug 2012 17:40:06 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
cc:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, sedat.dilek@...il.com,
	Paul McKenney <paul.mckenney@...aro.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-next <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [next-20120823] NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 200 on s/r

On Fri, 24 Aug 2012, Paul E. McKenney wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 09:26:08AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 12:04 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> > 
> > > Jack Winter confirmed to see similiar NOHZ messages also on
> > > v3.4.9-rt17 kernel (CPU: Core2Duo when no suspend performed):
> > > 
> > > [15223.171585] NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 08
> > 
> > These can be caused by blocking while holding local_softirq_lock.

> > Even with per softirq threads, and then (yet more overhead) splitting
> > the lock to make sure one softirq type can't block another, _and_ only
> > griping if the lock for the pending softirq is _not_ held, seems the
> > little bugger can still be triggered very rarely by syn flood induced
> > handler bail/raise.  Annoying little gripe :)
> 
> Hmmm...  Now that you mention it, if I understand correctly, the
> conversion of spinlocks to sleeplocks in -rt would seem to invalidate
> this particular diagnostic completely.
> 
> So, what am I missing?

I wonder whether the softirq_check_pending_idle() check needs a few
tweaks for RT, but I have to see a proper context for the failure
scenario first.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/