Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1711595
| From | "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | RE: [PATCH V2] kernel/watchdog: fix spurious hard lockups |
| Date | 2017-08-15 03:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ueyGv-35K-21@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <tVEMp-7yC-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <tWINX-6Zu-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <tX57P-5yg-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <u431g-6LV-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <u4fvt-6kS-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 01:24:23AM +0000, Liang, Kan wrote: > > Hi Don & Thomas, > > > > Sorry for the late response. We just finished the tests for all proposed > patches. > > > > There are three proposed patches so far. > > Patch 1: The patch as above which speed up the hrtimer. > > Patch 2: Thomas's first proposal. > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9803033/ > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9805903/ > > Patch 3: my original proposal which increase the NMI watchdog timeout > > by 3X https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9802053/ > > > > According to our test, only patch 3 works well. > > The other two patches will hang the system eventually. > > For patch 1, the system hang after running our test case for ~1 hour. > > For patch 2, the system hang in running the overnight test. > > There is no error message shown when the system hang. So I don't know > > the root cause yet. > > Hi Kan, > > Thanks for the feedback. Odd that the different patches had different results. > What is more odd to me is the hang. I thought these were all false lockups > that prematurely panic'd and rebooted the box. > > Is the machine configured to panic on hardlockup and reboot? Perhaps > kdump is enabled to store the console log for review upon reboot? > > It almost implies that a hardlockup did happen but isnt' being detected until > later?? > > > > BTW: We set 1 to watchdog_thresh when we did the test. > > It's believed that can speed up the failure. > > Sure, you/they look for 1 second hangs instead of 10 second ones. But with > patch3 it is more like 3 seconds'ish vs 30 second'ish. > > As Thomas asked, I would also be interested in the way the test works. The > hang doesn't make sense. > Hi Don and Thomas, Sorry for the late response. We have confirmed that the hardlock with "speed up the hrtimer" patch is actually another issue. Tim has already proposed a patch to fix it. Here is his patch. https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/8/14/1000 This patch which speed up the hrtimer (https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/6/26/685) is decent to fix the spurious hard lockups. Tested-by: Kan Liang <kan.liang@intel.com> Please consider to merge it into both mainline and stable tree. Thanks, Kan
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
RE: [PATCH V2] kernel/watchdog: fix spurious hard lockups "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com> - 2017-08-15 03:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH V2] kernel/watchdog: fix spurious hard lockups Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-08-15 03:30 +0200
RE: [PATCH V2] kernel/watchdog: fix spurious hard lockups Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2017-08-15 10:00 +0200
RE: [PATCH V2] kernel/watchdog: fix spurious hard lockups "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com> - 2017-08-17 17:50 +0200
[tip:core/urgent] kernel/watchdog: Prevent false positives with turbo modes tip-bot for Thomas Gleixner <tipbot@zytor.com> - 2017-08-18 12:50 +0200
csiph-web