[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150518090336.GA6393@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 11:03:37 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Ulrich Obergfell <uobergfe@...hat.com>,
Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: suspend regression in 4.1-rc1
On Mon 18-05-15 09:30:46, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 09:33:56PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz> wrote:
> > >
> > > The merge commit is empty and both 80dcc31fbe55 and e4b0db72be24 work
> > > properly but the merge is bad. So it seems like some of the commits in
> > > either branch has a side effect which needs other branch in order to
> > > reproduce.
> > >
> > > So've tried to bisect ^80dcc31fbe55 e4b0db72be24 and merged 80dcc31fbe55
> > > in each step.
> >
> > Good extra work! Thanks.
> >
> > > This lead to:
> > >
> > > commit 195daf665a6299de98a4da3843fed2dd9de19d3a
> > > Author: Ulrich Obergfell <uobergfe@...hat.com>
> > > Date: Tue Apr 14 15:44:13 2015 -0700
> > >
> > > watchdog: enable the new user interface of the watchdog mechanism
> > >
> > > The patch doesn't revert because of follow up changes so I have reverted
> > > all three:
> > > 692297d8f968 ("watchdog: introduce the hardlockup_detector_disable() function")
> > > b2f57c3a0df9 ("watchdog: clean up some function names and arguments")
> > > 195daf665a62 ("watchdog: enable the new user interface of the watchdog mechanism")
> >
> > Hmm. I guess we should just revert those three then. Unless somebody
> > can see what the subtle interaction is.
> >
> > Actually, looking closer, on the *other* side of the merge, the only
> > commit that looks like it might be conflicting is
> >
> > b3738d293233 "watchdog: Add watchdog enable/disable all functions"
> >
> > which is then used by
> >
> > b37609c30e41 "perf/x86/intel: Make the HT bug workaround
> > conditional on HT enabled"
> >
> > Does the problem go away if you revert *those* two commits instead?
> >
> > At least that would tell is what the exact bad interaction is.
> >
> > Adding Stephane (author of those watchdog/perf patches) to the Cc. And
> > PeterZ, who signed them off (Ingo also did, but was already on the
> > participants list).
> >
> > Anybody see it?
>
> The 'obvious' discrepancy is that 195daf665a62 ("watchdog: enable the
> new user interface of the watchdog mechanism") changes the semantics of
> watchdog_user_enabled, which thereafter is only used by the functions
> introduced by b3738d293233 ("watchdog: Add watchdog enable/disable all
> functions").
Yeah, this is it! b3738d293233 was definitely in the range I was testing
when merging 195daf665 into e95e7f627062..80dcc31fbe55. I must have
screwed something.
> There further appears to be a distinct lack of serialization between
> setting and using watchdog_enabled, so perhaps we should wrap the
> {en,dis}able_all() things in watchdog_proc_mutex.
>
> Let me go see if I can reproduce / test this.. as is the below is
> entirely untested.
This doesn't hang anymore. I've just had to move the mutex definition
up to make it compile. So feel free to add my
Reported-and-tested-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
Thanks!
diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
index 56aeedb087e3..c398596c35b8 100644
--- a/kernel/watchdog.c
+++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
@@ -604,6 +604,8 @@ static void watchdog_nmi_disable(unsigned int cpu)
}
}
+static DEFINE_MUTEX(watchdog_proc_mutex);
+
void watchdog_nmi_enable_all(void)
{
int cpu;
@@ -752,8 +754,6 @@ static int proc_watchdog_update(void)
}
-static DEFINE_MUTEX(watchdog_proc_mutex);
-
/*
* common function for watchdog, nmi_watchdog and soft_watchdog parameter
*
>
> ---
> kernel/watchdog.c | 10 +++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
> index 2316f50b07a4..56aeedb087e3 100644
> --- a/kernel/watchdog.c
> +++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
> @@ -608,19 +608,25 @@ void watchdog_nmi_enable_all(void)
> {
> int cpu;
>
> - if (!watchdog_user_enabled)
> + mutex_lock(&watchdog_proc_mutex);
> +
> + if (!(watchdog_enabled & NMI_WATCHDOG_ENABLED))
> return;
>
> get_online_cpus();
> for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> watchdog_nmi_enable(cpu);
> put_online_cpus();
> +
> + mutex_unlock(&watchdog_proc_mutex);
> }
>
> void watchdog_nmi_disable_all(void)
> {
> int cpu;
>
> + mutex_lock(&watchdog_proc_mutex);
> +
> if (!watchdog_running)
> return;
>
> @@ -628,6 +634,8 @@ void watchdog_nmi_disable_all(void)
> for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> watchdog_nmi_disable(cpu);
> put_online_cpus();
> +
> + mutex_unlock(&watchdog_proc_mutex);
> }
> #else
> static int watchdog_nmi_enable(unsigned int cpu) { return 0; }
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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