[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51E045E0.8020702@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 12:07:28 -0600
From: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
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 7/12/13 11:50 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
> Given you can run trinity long enough that you hit this however, makes me
> think you won't be able to triger the bug I'm talking about.
> Perhaps virtualised perf counters are somehow immune to this problem, because
> on bare-metal, it literally takes seconds.
I can generate the message it just does not lock up:
...
[ 131.837129] perf samples too long (35849 > 35714), lowering
kernel.perf_event_max_sample_rate to 4000
...
[ 237.271170] INFO: NMI handler (perf_event_nmi_handler) took too long
to run: 57900.001 msecs
And Dave Hansen: I think nmi.c has the same do_div problem as
kernel/events/core.c that Stephane fixed. Your patch has:
whole_msecs = do_div(delta, (1000 * 1000));
decimal_msecs = do_div(delta, 1000) % 1000;
David
--
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