[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <506828BF.9050409@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2012 13:10:55 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
CC: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...hat.com>,
Christian Hoffmann <email@...istianhoffmann.info>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, johnstul@...ibm.com,
tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks: { 1} (detected
by 0, t=10002 jiffies)
On 09/28/2012 05:35 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 12:40:44PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 09:28:50PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> > On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:54:00AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 09:45:43AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> > > > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 04:15:01PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>
> [ . . . ]
>
>> > > > But could you also please send your .config file and a description of
>> > >
>> > > .config attached.
>> > >
>> > > > the workload you are running?
>> > >
>> > > It's basically the below commands. The exact initrd is not relevant in
>> > > this case because it's a boot time warning before user space is
>> > > started. The stalls roughly happen 1 time on every 10 boots.
>> >
>> > Yow!!!
>> >
>> > You have severe cross-CPU time-synchronization problems. See for
>> > example the first dmesg, with the relevant part extracted right here.
>> > One CPU believes that it is about 37 seconds past boot, and the other
>> > CPU beleives that it is about 137 seconds past boot. Given that large
>> > of a time difference, an RCU CPU stall warning is expected behavior.
>>
>> Good spot! Yeah I noticed that huge timestamp gap, however didn't take
>> it seriously enough..
>>
>> > Get your two CPUs in agreement about what time it is, and I bet that
>> > the CPU stall warnings will go away.
>>
>> Possibly KVM related? Because the warnings show up in many test boxes
>> running KVM and so is not likely some hardware specific issue.
>
> I vaguely recall seeing something recently. But let's ask the KVM and
> timekeeping guys.
>From the logs it looks like hpet (why not kvmclock?) is used for the
clock, it should not generate such drifts since it is a global clock.
Can you verify current_clocksource on a boot that actually failed (in
case the clocksource is switched during runtime)?
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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