[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cfa4ec0f8f26ffceb6adcea96a182736519886ef.camel@surriel.com>
Date: Thu, 09 May 2024 09:41:27 -0400
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, Dave Young
<dyoung@...hat.com>, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/proc: fix softlockup in __read_vmcore
On Thu, 2024-05-09 at 11:52 +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 05/07/24 at 09:18am, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > While taking a kernel core dump with makedumpfile on a larger
> > system,
> > softlockup messages often appear.
> >
> > While softlockup warnings can be harmless, they can also interfere
> > with things like RCU freeing memory, which can be problematic when
> > the kdump kexec image is configured with as little memory as
> > possible.
> >
> > Avoid the softlockup, and give things like work items and RCU a
> > chance to do their thing during __read_vmcore by adding a
> > cond_resched.
>
> Thanks for fixing this.
>
> By the way, is it easy to reproduce? And should we add some trace of
> the
> softlockup into log so that people can search for it and confirm when
> encountering it?
It is pretty easy to reproduce, but it does not happen all the time.
With millions of systems, even rare errors are common :)
However, we have been running with this fix for long enough (we
deployed it in order to test it) that I don't think we have theĀ
warning stored any more. Those logs were rotated out long ago.
kind regards,
Rik
--
All Rights Reversed.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists