[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141120233920.GC25393@htj.dyndns.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 18:39:20 -0500
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>
Subject: Re: frequent lockups in 3.18rc4
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 03:08:03PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > So, for now, all we need is adding nmi check in percpu accessors,
> > right?
> >
>
> What's the issue with nmi? Page faults are supposed to nest correctly
> inside nmi, right?
Thought they couldn't. Looking at the trace that Frederic linked, it
looks like straight-out tracing function recursion due to an
unexpected fault while holding a lock. I don't think this can be
annotated from percpu accessor side. There's nothing special about
the context. :(
Does this matter for anybody other than tracers? Ultimately, the
solution would be removing the vmalloc area faulting as Thomas
suggested.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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