[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFzRi+r4=8D+d5odaRMRNOWSY01ydsbreko7HNsD_Dg68Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 19:36:55 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: futex funkiness -- massive lockups
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com> wrote:
>
>
> From the paths related to futex wait we are stuck when taking the hb
> spinlock in futex_wait_setup >> queue_lock.
Just judging from your trace, I would have suspected a (possibly soft)
lockup in load_balance() rather than the futexes.
The futex being stuck seems expected, since one cpu is definitely
holding the lock - it was interrupted by a timer interrupt at the
successful return case of raw_spin_lock if I read the offset right.
So if that softirq is stuck - perhaps because it's in some endless
loop in load_balance(), or perhaps because it's spending so much time
load-balancing that the next balancing time happens immediately, or
whatever - then you'd see that trace.
Linus
--
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