[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131108204839.GD14606@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2013 21:48:41 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: perf/tracepoint: another fuzzer generated lockup
On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 03:23:07PM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Nov 2013, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >
> > There seem to be a loop that takes too long in intel_pmu_handle_irq(). Your two
> > previous reports seemed to suggest that lbr is involved, but not this one.
>
> I may be wrong but I think everything between <NMI> and <EOE> is just
> noise from the NMI perf-event watchdog timer kicking in.
Ah good point.
So the pattern seem to be that irq work/perf_event_wakeup is involved, may be
interrupting a tracepoint event or so.
It would be nice if you enable CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER in your future reports
so that we get more precise traces. Or may be you actually enabled it and it
doesn't work?
> Why that code would be reading the LBR registers I don't know.
Yeah that's just an inconditional call to check if there is lbr branch to record.
> Vince
>
>
--
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