[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <PH0PR11MB588099DBA57F16345037C348DA5F9@PH0PR11MB5880.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2022 02:24:47 +0000
From: "Zhang, Qiang1" <qiang1.zhang@...el.com>
To: Ammar Faizi <ammarfaizi2@...weeb.org>,
"paulmck@...nel.org" <paulmck@...nel.org>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] rcu: Add per-CPU rcuc task info to RCU CPU stall
warnings
On 1/24/22 11:42 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 05:38:21PM +0700, Ammar Faizi wrote:
>> [snip...]
>> FWIW, this one makes more sense:
>> ```
>> static void rcuc_kthread_dump(struct rcu_data *rdp) {
>> int cpu;
>> unsigned long j;
>> struct task_struct *rcuc;
>>
>> if (!rcu_is_rcuc_kthread_starving(rdp, &j))
>> return;
>>
>> rcuc = rdp->rcu_cpu_kthread_task;
>> if (!rcuc)
>> return;
>>
>> pr_err("%s kthread starved for %ld jiffies, stack dump:\n",
>> rcuc->comm, j);
>
> Thank you for looking this over and for the great feedback, Ammar!
>
> I am also wondering why the above message should be printed when the
> corresponding CPU is offline or idle. Why not move the above pr_err()
> line down to replace the pr_err() line below?
>
> Thanx, Paul
>>Hi Paul, Thank you for the review. Agree with that.
>>Hopefully this one looks better (untested):
>>```
>>static void rcuc_kthread_dump(struct rcu_data *rdp) {
>> int cpu;
>> unsigned long j;
>> struct task_struct *rcuc;
>>
>> rcuc = rdp->rcu_cpu_kthread_task;
>> if (!rcuc)
>> return;
>>
>> cpu = task_cpu(rcuc);
>> if (cpu_is_offline(cpu) || idle_cpu(cpu))
>> return;
>>
>> if (!rcu_is_rcuc_kthread_starving(rdp, &j))
>> return;
>>
>> pr_err("%s kthread starved for %ld jiffies\n", rcuc->comm, j);
>> sched_show_task(rcuc);
>> if (!trigger_single_cpu_backtrace(cpu))
>> dump_cpu_task(cpu);
>>}
>>```
>>Recall that dump_cpu_task looks like this:
>>```
>>void dump_cpu_task(int cpu)
>>{
>> pr_info("Task dump for CPU %d:\n", cpu);
>> sched_show_task(cpu_curr(cpu));
>>}
>>```
>>which already tells us it's a dump, so "stack dump" in the pr_err() can be omitted. Any comment, Zqiang?
Thanks Ammar, this look like more compact, I wiil resend.
Thanks
Zqiang
>>>>
>>--
>>Ammar Faizi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists