linux-kernel - NMI watchdog triggering during load

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 05 Mar 2015 21:05:28 -0700
From:	David Ahern <david.ahern@...cle.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: NMI watchdog triggering during load_balance

Hi Peter/Mike/Ingo:

I've been banging my against this wall for a week now and hoping you or 
someone could shed some light on the problem.

On larger systems (256 to 1024 cpus) there are several use cases (e.g., 
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/stream/) that regularly trigger the NMI 
watchdog with the stack trace:

Call Trace:
@  [000000000045d3d0] double_rq_lock+0x4c/0x68
@  [00000000004699c4] load_balance+0x278/0x740
@  [00000000008a7b88] __schedule+0x378/0x8e4
@  [00000000008a852c] schedule+0x68/0x78
@  [000000000042c82c] cpu_idle+0x14c/0x18c
@  [00000000008a3a50] after_lock_tlb+0x1b4/0x1cc

Capturing data for all CPUs I tend to see load_balance related stack 
traces on 700-800 cpus, with a few hundred blocked on _raw_spin_trylock_bh.

I originally thought it was a deadlock in the rq locking, but if I bump 
the watchdog timeout the system eventually recovers (after 10-30+ 
seconds of unresponsiveness) so it does not seem likely to be a deadlock.

This particluar system has 1024 cpus:
# lscpu
Architecture:          sparc64
CPU op-mode(s):        32-bit, 64-bit
Byte Order:            Big Endian
CPU(s):                1024
On-line CPU(s) list:   0-1023
Thread(s) per core:    8
Core(s) per socket:    4
Socket(s):             32
NUMA node(s):          4
NUMA node0 CPU(s):     0-255
NUMA node1 CPU(s):     256-511
NUMA node2 CPU(s):     512-767
NUMA node3 CPU(s):     768-1023

and there are 4 scheduling domains. An example of the domain debug 
output (condensed for the email):

CPU970 attaching sched-domain:
  domain 0: span 968-975 level SIBLING
   groups: 8 single CPU groups
   domain 1: span 968-975 level MC
    groups: 1 group with 8 cpus
    domain 2: span 768-1023 level CPU
     groups: 32 groups with 8 cpus per group
     domain 3: span 0-1023 level NODE
      groups: 4 groups with 256 cpus per group

On an idle system (20 or so non-kernel threads such as mingetty, udev, 
...) perf top shows the task scheduler is consuming significant time:

    PerfTop:  136580 irqs/sec  kernel:99.9%  exact:  0.0% [1000Hz 
cycles],  (all, 1024 CPUs)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

     20.22%  [kernel]  [k] find_busiest_group
     16.00%  [kernel]  [k] find_next_bit
      6.37%  [kernel]  [k] ktime_get_update_offsets
      5.70%  [kernel]  [k] ktime_get
...

This is a 2.6.39 kernel (yes, a relatively old one); 3.8 shows similar 
symptoms. 3.18 is much better.

 From what I can tell load balancing is happening non-stop and there is 
heavy contention in the run queue locks. I instrumented the rq locking 
and under load (e.g, the stream test) regularly see single rq locks held 
continuously for 2-3 seconds (e.g., at the end of the stream run which 
has 1024 threads and the process is terminating).

I have been staring at and instrumenting the scheduling code for days. 
It seems like the balancing of domains is regularly lining up on all or 
almost all CPUs and it seems like the NODE domain causes the most damage 
since it scans all cpus (ie., in rebalance_domains() each domain pass 
triggers a call to load_balance on all cpus at the same time). Just in 
random snapshots during a stream test I have seen 1 pass through 
rebalance_domains take > 17 seconds (custom tracepoints to tag start and 
end).

Since each domain is a superset of the lower one each pass through 
load_balance regularly repeats the processing of the previous domain 
(e.g., NODE domain repeats the cpus in the CPU domain). Then multiplying 
that across 1024 cpus and it seems like a of duplication.

Does that make sense or am I off in the weeds?

Thanks,
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/