[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87y2nhpvap.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2020 01:37:50 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: "Li\, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>,
Vineeth Remanan Pillai <vpillai@...italocean.com>,
Nishanth Aravamudan <naravamudan@...italocean.com>,
Julien Desfossez <jdesfossez@...italocean.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>, mingo@...nel.org,
pjt@...gle.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: "Joel Fernandes \(Google\)" <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, subhra.mazumdar@...cle.com,
fweisbec@...il.com, keescook@...omium.org, kerrnel@...gle.com,
Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>, Aaron Lu <aaron.lwe@...il.com>,
Aubrey Li <aubrey.intel@...il.com>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>, vineethrp@...il.com,
Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@...el.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...el.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 14/16] irq: Add support for core-wide protection of IRQ and softirq
"Li, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com> writes:
> On 2020/7/1 5:32, Vineeth Remanan Pillai wrote:
>
> We saw a lot of soft lockups on the screen when we tested v6.
>
> [ 186.527883] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#86 stuck for 22s! [uperf:5551]
> [ 186.535884] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#87 stuck for 22s! [uperf:5444]
> [ 186.555883] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#89 stuck for 22s! [uperf:5547]
> [ 187.547884] rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
> [ 187.553760] rcu: 40-....: (14997 ticks this GP) idle=49a/1/0x4000000000000002 softirq=1711/1711 fqs=7279
> [ 187.564685] NMI watchdog: Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu 14
> [ 187.564723] NMI watchdog: Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu 38
>
> The problem is gone when we reverted this patch. We are running multiple
> uperf threads(equal to cpu number) in a cgroup with coresched enabled.
> This is 100% reproducible on our side.
ROTFL. I just predicted that from staring at the patch ....
Powered by blists - more mailing lists