[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51E026F3.6010505@sr71.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 08:55:31 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net>
To: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: Yet more softlockups.
On 07/12/2013 08:45 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 08:38:52AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > Dave, for your case, my suspicion would be that it got turned on
> > inadvertently, or that we somehow have a bug which bumped up
> > perf_event.c's 'active_events' and we're running some perf code that we
> > don't have to.
>
> What do you 'inadvertantly' ? I see this during bootup every time.
> Unless systemd or something has started playing with perf, (which afaik it isn't)
I mean that somebody turned 'active_events' on without actually wanting
perf to be on. I'd be curious how it got set to something nonzero.
Could you stick a WARN_ONCE() or printk_ratelimit() on the three sites
that modify it?
> > But, I'm suspicious. I was having all kinds of issues with perf and
> > NMIs taking hundreds of milliseconds. I never isolated it to having a
> > real, single, cause. I attributed it to my large NUMA system just being
> > slow. Your description makes me wonder what I missed, though.
>
> Here's a fun trick:
>
> trinity -c perf_event_open -C4 -q -l off
>
> Within about a minute, that brings any of my boxes to its knees.
> The softlockup detector starts going nuts, and then the box wedges solid.
On my box, the same happens with 'perf top'. ;)
*But* dropping the perf sample rate has been really effective at keeping
me from hitting it, and I've had to use _lots_ of CPUs (60-160) doing
those NMIs at once to trigger the lockups.
Being able to trigger it with so few CPUs is interesting though. I'll
try on my hardware.
--
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