On 01/22/2015 10:51 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:29:01PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> > On 01/21/2015 07:43 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>> > > On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 10:44:57AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>>> > >> On 01/20/2015 09:57 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>>>>>> > >>>>> So RCU believes that an RCU read-side critical section that
>>>>>>> > >>>>> ended within
>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> an interrupt handler (in this case, an hrtimer) somehow got
>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> preempted.
>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Which is not supposed to happen.
>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Do you have CONFIG_PROVE_RCU enabled? If not, could you
>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> please enable it
>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> and retry?
>>>>>>> > >>>>>
>>>>>>> > >>>>> I did have CONFIG_PROVE_RCU, and didn't see anything else
>>>>>>> > >>>>> besides what I pasted here.
>>>>> > >>> OK, fair enough. I do have a stack of RCU CPU stall-warning
>>>>> > >>> changes on
>>>>> > >>> their way in, please see v3.19-rc1..630181c4a915 in -rcu, which is
>>>>> > >>> at:
>>>>> > >>>
>>>>> > >>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git
>>>>> > >>>
>>>>> > >>> These handle the problems that Dave Jones, yourself, and a few
>>>>> > >>> others
>>>>> > >>> located this past December. Could you please give them a spin?
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> They seem to be a part of -next already, so this testing already
>>>> > >> includes them.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> I seem to be getting them about once a day, anything I can add to
>>>> > >> debug it?
>>> > >
>>> > > Could you please try reproducing with the following patch?
>> >
>> > Yes, and I've got mixed results. It reproduced, and all I got was:
>> >
>> > [ 717.645572] ===============================
>> > [ 717.645572] [ INFO: suspicious RCU usage. ]
>> > [ 717.645572] 3.19.0-rc5-next-20150121-sasha-00064-g3c37e35-dirty #1809
>> > Tainted: G W
>> > [ 717.645572] -------------------------------
>> > [ 717.645572] kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h:337 rcu_read_unlock() from irq or
>> > softirq with blocking in critical section!!!
>> > [ 717.645572] !
>> > [ 717.645572]
>> > [ 717.645572] other info that might help us debug this:
>> > [ 717.645572]
>> > [ 717.645572]
>> > [ 717.645572] rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 1
>> > [ 717.645572] 3 locks held by trinity-c29/16497:
>> > [ 717.645572] #0: (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key){+.+.+.}, at:
>> > [<ffffffff81bec373>] lookup_slow+0xd3/0x420
>> > [ 717.645572] #1:
>> > [hang]
>> >
>> > So the rest of the locks/stack trace didn't get printed, nor the
>> > pr_alert() which
>> > should follow that.
>> >
>> > I've removed the lockdep call and will re-run it.
> Thank you! You are keeping the pr_alert(), correct?
Yup, just the lockdep call goes away.
Thanks,
Sasha
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
