[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140116141743.GT31570@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 15:17:43 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Cc: raistlin@...ux.it, juri.lelli@...il.com,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] [ tip/sched/core ] System unresponsive after booting
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 02:48:51PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> 3570 sched_getparam(3570, { 0 }) = 0
> 3570 sched_getscheduler(3570) = 0 (SCHED_OTHER)
> 3570 sched_get_priority_min(SCHED_OTHER) = 0
> 3570 sched_get_priority_max(SCHED_OTHER) = 0
> 3571 sched_get_priority_min(SCHED_OTHER) = 0
> 3571 sched_get_priority_max(SCHED_OTHER) = 0
> 3571 sched_get_priority_min(SCHED_OTHER) = 0
> 3571 sched_get_priority_max(SCHED_OTHER) = 0
> 3571 sched_setscheduler(3572, SCHED_OTHER, { 0 } <unfinished ...>
> 3571 <... sched_setscheduler resumed> ) = 0
> 3571 sched_get_priority_min(SCHED_OTHER <unfinished ...>
> 3571 <... sched_get_priority_min resumed> ) = 0
> 3571 sched_get_priority_max(SCHED_OTHER <unfinished ...>
> 3571 <... sched_get_priority_max resumed> ) = 0
> 3571 sched_setscheduler(3573, SCHED_OTHER, { 0 } <unfinished ...>
> 3571 <... sched_setscheduler resumed> ) = -1 EPERM (Operation not
> permitted)
> 3571 sched_get_priority_min(SCHED_OTHER <unfinished ...>
> 3571 <... sched_get_priority_min resumed> ) = 0
> 3571 sched_get_priority_max(SCHED_OTHER <unfinished ...>
> 3571 <... sched_get_priority_max resumed> ) = 0
> 3571 sched_setscheduler(3574, SCHED_OTHER, { 0 } <unfinished ...>
> 3571 <... sched_setscheduler resumed> ) = -1 EPERM (Operation not
> permitted)
>
> The same strace but on a kernel which does not hang. The calls to
> sched_setscheduler do not fail.
>
> 3292 sched_getparam(3292, { 0 }) = 0
> 3292 sched_getscheduler(3292) = 0 (SCHED_OTHER)
> 3292 sched_get_priority_min(SCHED_OTHER) = 0
> 3292 sched_get_priority_max(SCHED_OTHER) = 0
> 3293 sched_get_priority_min(SCHED_OTHER) = 0
> 3293 sched_get_priority_max(SCHED_OTHER) = 0
> 3293 sched_get_priority_min(SCHED_OTHER) = 0
> 3293 sched_get_priority_max(SCHED_OTHER) = 0
> 3293 sched_setscheduler(3294, SCHED_OTHER, { 0 } <unfinished ...>
> 3293 <... sched_setscheduler resumed> ) = 0
> 3293 sched_get_priority_min(SCHED_OTHER <unfinished ...>
> 3293 <... sched_get_priority_min resumed> ) = 0
> 3293 sched_get_priority_max(SCHED_OTHER <unfinished ...>
> 3293 <... sched_get_priority_max resumed> ) = 0
> 3293 sched_setscheduler(3295, SCHED_OTHER, { 0 } <unfinished ...>
> 3293 <... sched_setscheduler resumed> ) = 0
> 3293 sched_get_priority_min(SCHED_OTHER <unfinished ...>
> 3293 <... sched_get_priority_min resumed> ) = 0
> 3293 sched_get_priority_max(SCHED_OTHER <unfinished ...>
> 3293 <... sched_get_priority_max resumed> ) = 0
> 3293 sched_setscheduler(3296, SCHED_OTHER, { 0 } <unfinished ...>
> 3293 <... sched_setscheduler resumed> ) = 0
>
> The EPERM error comes from kernel/sched/core.c:3303
>
> ...
> if (fair_policy(policy)) {
> if (!can_nice(p, attr->sched_nice))
> return -EPERM;
> }
> ...
>
>
> But I don't know why this is leading to block a process or making rsyslogd
> being not woken up by a packet coming in the af_unix socket.
Could you test with a fresh tip/master, Ingo just pushed out a stack of
fixes, in particularly:
e3de300d1212b ("sched: Preserve the nice level over sched_setscheduler() and sched_setparam() calls")
39fd8fd22b322 ("sched: Fix up scheduler syscall LTP fails")
Could have affected things.
Meanwhile I'll try and better read what the above says.
Thanks!
--
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