Re: [uml-devel] UML hang with 100% CPU
> > Strangely enough after continuing in gdb, UML is back to normal, and I > > can't make it hang any more. It must be something timing related. > > Can you see if the patch below fixes it? Yay! Got my nice fast UML back instead of ugly slow QEmu ;) Seems to work perfectly now. Thanks, Miklos - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [uml-devel] UML hang with 100% CPU
On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 09:13:36PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> Strangely enough after continuing in gdb, UML is back to normal, and I
> can't make it hang any more. It must be something timing related.
Can you see if the patch below fixes it?
Jeff
--
Work email - jdike at linux dot intel dot com
Index: linux-2.6.18-mm/arch/um/os-Linux/sigio.c
===
--- linux-2.6.18-mm.orig/arch/um/os-Linux/sigio.c 2007-02-08
16:48:00.0 -0500
+++ linux-2.6.18-mm/arch/um/os-Linux/sigio.c2007-02-14 19:16:22.0
-0500
@@ -97,20 +97,22 @@ static int write_sigio_thread(void *unus
static int need_poll(struct pollfds *polls, int n)
{
- if(n <= polls->size){
- polls->used = n;
+ struct pollfd *new;
+
+ if(n <= polls->size)
return 0;
- }
- kfree(polls->poll);
- polls->poll = um_kmalloc_atomic(n * sizeof(struct pollfd));
- if(polls->poll == NULL){
+
+ new = um_kmalloc_atomic(n * sizeof(struct pollfd));
+ if(new == NULL){
printk("need_poll : failed to allocate new pollfds\n");
- polls->size = 0;
- polls->used = 0;
return -ENOMEM;
}
+
+ memcpy(new, polls->poll, polls->used * sizeof(struct pollfd));
+ kfree(polls->poll);
+
+ polls->poll = new;
polls->size = n;
- polls->used = n;
return 0;
}
@@ -171,15 +173,15 @@ int add_sigio_fd(int fd)
goto out;
}
- n = current_poll.used + 1;
- err = need_poll(&next_poll, n);
+ n = current_poll.used;
+ err = need_poll(&next_poll, n + 1);
if(err)
goto out;
- for(i = 0; i < current_poll.used; i++)
- next_poll.poll[i] = current_poll.poll[i];
-
- next_poll.poll[n - 1] = *p;
+ memcpy(next_poll.poll, current_poll.poll,
+ current_poll.used * sizeof(struct pollfd));
+ next_poll.poll[n] = *p;
+ next_poll.used = n + 1;
update_thread();
out:
sigio_unlock();
@@ -214,6 +216,7 @@ int ignore_sigio_fd(int fd)
if(p->fd != fd)
next_poll.poll[n++] = *p;
}
+ next_poll.used = current_poll.used - 1;
update_thread();
out:
@@ -331,10 +334,9 @@ void maybe_sigio_broken(int fd, int read
sigio_lock();
err = need_poll(&all_sigio_fds, all_sigio_fds.used + 1);
- if(err){
- printk("maybe_sigio_broken - failed to add pollfd\n");
+ if(err)
goto out;
- }
+
all_sigio_fds.poll[all_sigio_fds.used++] =
((struct pollfd) { .fd = fd,
.events = read ? POLLIN : POLLOUT,
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [uml-devel] UML hang with 100% CPU
Hi, On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 07:46:47PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > It boots fine, then usually just after logging in and before starting > the shell (but sometimes after the shell started) it gets into some > loop. Looking at the strace shows that two processes are > sending/receiving single '\0' bytes on some sockets endlessly. > > Does this ring a bell? On 2/8/07, Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: No, it doesn't. This is a strace on the host, I take it? Can you get backtraces from the processes? Just a datapoint: I had a similar problem with UML hanging on 2.6.20-rc something _host_ kernel whereas 2.6.19 worked fine. That was with Gentoo userspace which I don't have anymore. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [uml-devel] UML hang with 100% CPU
> No, it doesn't. This is a strace on the host, I take it? Yes. > Can you get backtraces from the processes? Here's one: #0 0xe410 in __kernel_vsyscall () #1 0xb7f0fbc3 in write () from /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6 #2 0x08066f52 in file_io (fd=10, buf=0x8a0fc8b, len=1, io_proc=0x8056a68 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, copy_user_proc=0x8059826 ) at arch/um/os-Linux/file.c:337 #3 0x08067002 in os_write_file (fd=10, buf=0x8a0fc8b, len=1) at arch/um/os-Linux/file.c:359 #4 0x08069317 in update_thread () at arch/um/os-Linux/sigio.c:127 #5 0x080694eb in add_sigio_fd (fd=8) at arch/um/os-Linux/sigio.c:183 #6 0x080581b2 in reactivate_fd (fd=8, irqnum=11) at arch/um/kernel/irq.c:290 #7 0x08059f5f in sigio_interrupt (irq=11, data=0x0) at arch/um/kernel/sigio.c:25 #8 0x08094759 in handle_IRQ_event (irq=11, action=0x8798380) at kernel/irq/handle.c:141 #9 0x080947fb in __do_IRQ (irq=11) at kernel/irq/handle.c:233 #10 0x0805829c in do_IRQ (irq=11, regs=0x879c3b0) at arch/um/kernel/irq.c:361 #11 0x08057e58 in sigio_handler (sig=29, regs=0x879c3b0) at arch/um/kernel/irq.c:105 #12 0x0806d31e in sig_handler_common_skas (sig=29, sc_ptr=0x0) at arch/um/os-Linux/skas/trap.c:52 #13 0x08069c8a in unblock_signals () at arch/um/os-Linux/signal.c:217 #14 0x0810500c in __make_request (q=0x8799a94, bio=0x895f8c0) ---Type to continue, or q to quit--- at block/ll_rw_blk.c:3016 #15 0x08105433 in generic_make_request (bio=0x895f8c0) at block/ll_rw_blk.c:3212 #16 0x08105509 in submit_bio (rw=1, bio=0x895f8c0) at block/ll_rw_blk.c:3251 #17 0x080d09cb in submit_bh (rw=1, bh=0x9d5a8c0) at fs/buffer.c:2681 #18 0x080f8fcd in journal_do_submit_data (wbuf=0x8759000, bufs=3) at fs/jbd/commit.c:170 #19 0x080f90e0 in journal_submit_data_buffers (journal=0x88ff580, commit_transaction=0x8c07500) at fs/jbd/commit.c:275 #20 0x080f935c in journal_commit_transaction (journal=0x88ff580) at fs/jbd/commit.c:432 #21 0x080fba41 in kjournald (arg=0x88ff580) at fs/jbd/journal.c:151 #22 0x0808905a in kthread (_create=0x889fc4c) at kernel/kthread.c:105 #23 0x080690f1 in run_kernel_thread (fn=0x8088fb3 , arg=0x889fc4c, jmp_ptr=0x879c688) at arch/um/os-Linux/process.c:289 #24 0x0805c975 in new_thread_handler () at arch/um/kernel/skas/process.c:64 #25 0x in ?? () And the other doesn't seem to be so interesting: #0 0xe410 in __kernel_vsyscall () #1 0xb7f157cb in poll () from /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6 #2 0x0806913b in write_sigio_thread (unused=0x0) at arch/um/os-Linux/sigio.c:61 #3 0xb7f1f51e in clone () from /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6 Strangely enough after continuing in gdb, UML is back to normal, and I can't make it hang any more. It must be something timing related. Miklos - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [uml-devel] UML hang with 100% CPU
On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 07:46:47PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > It boots fine, then usually just after logging in and before starting > the shell (but sometimes after the shell started) it gets into some > loop. Looking at the strace shows that two processes are > sending/receiving single '\0' bytes on some sockets endlessly. > > Does this ring a bell? No, it doesn't. This is a strace on the host, I take it? Can you get backtraces from the processes? Jeff -- Work email - jdike at linux dot intel dot com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
