lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZeBoTNe2cjb4BeXb@alley>
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 12:19:40 +0100
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To: "John B. Wyatt IV" <jwyatt@...hat.com>
Cc: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
	Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>, jlelli@...hat.com,
	Derek Barbosa <debarbos@...hat.com>,
	"John B. Wyatt IV" <sageofredondo@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: NMI Reported with console_blast.sh

On Thu 2024-02-29 12:15:30, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Thu 2024-02-22 00:21:19, John B. Wyatt IV wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 04:23:04PM -0500, John B. Wyatt IV wrote:
> > > 
> > > Red Hat's conservers are having an issue with the machine I was testing
> > > on. It may take me a while to get back to you with more test results.
> > > 
> > 
> > Found a work-around with conserver. I was able to follow up on the printk-caller
> > info you requested.
> > 
> > I found 2 additional NMIs for a total of 3. Number 2 is very
> > large-please feel free to let me know what specific information you
> > wanted if it was unnecessary.

[...]

> > Compared to the two NMIs with throughput-performance (no preemption)
> > 
> >   <NMI>
> >   cpus=0
> >    .runnable_avg                  : 3072
> >  kthread (kernel/kthread.c:388) 
> >    .util_est_enqueued             : 0
> >   stack:0     pid:1733  tgid:1733  ppid:2      flags:0x00004000
> >    .min_vruntime                  : 2084315.290254
> >    .removed.load_avg              : 0
> >    .avg_vruntime                  : 2084315.290254
> >  console_blast.s  3497     34770.405603 N     34773.405603         3.000000     34764.898340         4   120 
> >    .util_avg                      : 1024
> >    .util_avg                      : 1024
> 
> It looks like messages from more (many) CPUs are mixed. I guess that they
> are printed by print_cfs_rq(). But the order looks random.
> 
> Also I wonder why it is printed from NMI context. Maybe, it is from
> some perf event, similar to hardlockup detector?

I have realized that we most likely see only small part of the mixed
output. I wonder if it is because it is printed from the emergency
context. Here the messages are flushed when leaving the context
and many might be lost.

Best Regards,
Petr

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ