[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEXW_YQNRQuPP8GzHMZXWPoLmbpK3rB_+eVXmiRu6RrsihrEpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2023 22:47:36 -0700
From: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: rcu@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...a.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
Zqiang <qiang1.zhang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH rcu 5/6] doc/rcutorture: Add description of rcutorture.stall_cpu_block
On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 10:12 AM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> From: Zqiang <qiang1.zhang@...el.com>
>
> If you build a kernel with CONFIG_PREEMPTION=n and CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT=y,
> then run the rcutorture tests specifying stalls as follows:
>
> runqemu kvm slirp nographic qemuparams="-m 1024 -smp 4" \
> bootparams="console=ttyS0 rcutorture.stall_cpu=30 \
> rcutorture.stall_no_softlockup=1 rcutorture.stall_cpu_block=1" -d
>
> The tests will produce the following splat:
>
> [ 10.841071] rcu-torture: rcu_torture_stall begin CPU stall
> [ 10.841073] rcu_torture_stall start on CPU 3.
> [ 10.841077] BUG: scheduling while atomic: rcu_torture_sta/66/0x0000000
> ....
> [ 10.841108] Call Trace:
> [ 10.841110] <TASK>
> [ 10.841112] dump_stack_lvl+0x64/0xb0
> [ 10.841118] dump_stack+0x10/0x20
> [ 10.841121] __schedule_bug+0x8b/0xb0
> [ 10.841126] __schedule+0x2172/0x2940
> [ 10.841157] schedule+0x9b/0x150
> [ 10.841160] schedule_timeout+0x2e8/0x4f0
> [ 10.841192] schedule_timeout_uninterruptible+0x47/0x50
> [ 10.841195] rcu_torture_stall+0x2e8/0x300
> [ 10.841199] kthread+0x175/0x1a0
> [ 10.841206] ret_from_fork+0x2c/0x50
Another way to get rid of the warning would be to replace the
cur_ops->readlock() with rcu_read_lock(). Though perhaps that will not
test whether the particular RCU flavor under testing is capable of
causing a stall :-).
> rcutorture.stall_cpu_block= [KNL]
> Sleep while stalling if set. This will result
> - in warnings from preemptible RCU in addition
> - to any other stall-related activity.
> + in warnings from preemptible RCU in addition to
> + any other stall-related activity. Note that
> + in kernels built with CONFIG_PREEMPTION=n and
> + CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT=y, this parameter will
> + cause the CPU to pass through a quiescent state.
> + Any such quiescent states will suppress RCU CPU
> + stall warnings, but the time-based sleep will
> + also result in scheduling-while-atomic splats.
Could change last part to "but may also result in
scheduling-while-atomic splats as preemption might be disabled for
certain RCU flavors in order to cause the stall".
> + Which might or might not be what you want.
> +
Suggest drop this line ;-).
- Joel
> rcutorture.stall_cpu_holdoff= [KNL]
> Time to wait (s) after boot before inducing stall.
> --
> 2.40.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists