Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 15 Aug 2014 08:04:05 -0700 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/2] rcu: Parallelize and economize NOCB kthread wakeups |
| |
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 10:54:11AM +0530, Amit Shah wrote: > On (Wed) 13 Aug 2014 [06:00:49], Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:14:39AM +0530, Amit Shah wrote: > > > On (Tue) 12 Aug 2014 [14:41:51], Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 02:39:36PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 09:06:21AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:03:21AM +0530, Amit Shah wrote: > > > > > > > > > > [ . . . ] > > > > > > > > > > > > I know of only virtio-console doing this (via userspace only, > > > > > > > though). > > > > > > > > > > > > As in userspace within the guest? That would not work. The userspace > > > > > > that the qemu is running in might. There is a way to extract ftrace info > > > > > > from crash dumps, so one approach would be "sendkey alt-sysrq-c", then > > > > > > pull the buffer from the resulting dump. For all I know, there might also > > > > > > be some script that uses the qemu "x" command to get at the ftrace buffer. > > > > > > > > > > > > Again, I cannot reproduce this, and I have been through the code several > > > > > > times over the past few days, and am not seeing it. I could start > > > > > > sending you random diagnostic patches, but it would be much better if > > > > > > we could get the trace data from the failure. > > > > > > I think the only recourse I now have is to dump the guest state from > > > qemu, and attempt to find the ftrace buffers by poking pages and > > > finding some ftrace-like struct... and then dumping the buffers. > > > > The data exists in the qemu guest state, so it would be good to have > > it one way or another. My current (perhaps self-serving) guess is that > > you have come up with a way to trick qemu into dropping IPIs. > > I didn't get around to doing this yet; will get to it next week. > > In the meantime, I tried this on RHEL6 (with RHEL6 qemu and gcc and > seabios), and that exhibits the problem similarly with my .config.
And I am running my tests successfully on an x86_64 system running Ubuntu 12.04. Some testing on 14.04 seems to require booting with acpi=off, leading to my perhaps self-serving guess above.
> <snip> > > > > > + > > > > return true; > > > > > > I have return 1; here. > > > > > > I'm on linux.git, c8d6637d0497d62093dbba0694c7b3a80b79bfe1. > > > > I am working on top of my -rcu tree, which contains the fix from "1" to > > "true" compared to current mainline. So this will resolve itself, and > > you should be OK fixing up conflict in either direction. > > Yep, I did do that. Just noted here that the hunk didn't directly > apply.
Fair enough, thank you for letting me know.
Thanx, Paul
| |