[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150402095533.GA4968@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 11:55:33 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Chris J Arges <chris.j.arges@...onical.com>,
Rafael David Tinoco <inaddy@...ntu.com>,
Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Gema Gomez <gema.gomez-solano@...onical.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: smp_call_function_single lockups
* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 7:32 AM, Chris J Arges
> <chris.j.arges@...onical.com> wrote:
> >
> > I included the full patch in reply to Ingo's email, and when
> > running with that I no longer get the ack_APIC_irq WARNs.
>
> Ok. That means that the printk's themselves just change timing
> enough, or change the compiler instruction scheduling so that it
> hides the apic problem.
So another possibility would be that it's the third change causing
this change in behavior:
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
index 6cedd7914581..833a981c5420 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
@@ -335,9 +340,11 @@ int apic_retrigger_irq(struct irq_data *data)
void apic_ack_edge(struct irq_data *data)
{
+ ack_APIC_irq();
+
+ /* Might generate IPIs, so do this after having ACKed the APIC: */
irq_complete_move(irqd_cfg(data));
irq_move_irq(data);
- ack_APIC_irq();
}
/*
... since with this we won't send IPIs in a semi-nested fashion with
an unacked APIC, which is a good idea to do in general. It's also a
weird enough hardware pattern that virtualization's APIC emulation
might get it slightly wrong or slightly different.
> Which very much indicates that these things are interconnected.
>
> For example, Ingo's printk patch does
>
> cfg->move_in_progress =
> cpumask_intersects(cfg->old_domain, cpu_online_mask);
> + if (cfg->move_in_progress)
> + pr_info("apic: vector %02x,
> same-domain move in progress\n", cfg->vector);
> cpumask_and(cfg->domain, cfg->domain, tmp_mask);
>
> and that means that now the setting of move_in_progress is
> serialized with the cpumask_and() in a way that it wasn't before.
Yeah, that's a possibility too. It all looks very fragile.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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