Re: [Xen-devel] Regression introduced with 14e568e78f6f80ca1e27256641ddf524c7dbdc51 (stop_machine: Use smpboot threads)

[Sander Eikelenboom <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Tuesday, February 26, 2013, 1:36:36 PM, you wrote:

> On Fri, 22 Feb 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>> 
>> I don't know if this is b/c the Xen code is missing something or
>> expects something that never happend. I hadn't looked at your
>> patch in any detail (was going to do that on Monday).
>> 
>> Either way, if I boot a HVM guest with PV extensions (aka PVHVM)

Hmm i'm seeing this booting on baremetal as well.
(see http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1302.3/00836.html)

>> this is I what get:
>> [    0.133081] cpu 1 spinlock event irq 71
>> [    0.134049] smpboot: Booting Node   0, Processors  #1[    0.008000] 
>> installing Xen timer for CPU 1
>> [    0.205154] Brought up 2 CPUs
>> [    0.205156] smpboot: Total of 2 processors activated (16021.74 BogoMIPS)
>> 
>> [   28.134000] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 23s! [migration/0:8]
>> [   28.134000] Modules linked in:
>> [   28.134000] CPU 0 
>> [   28.134000] Pid: 8, comm: migration/0 Tainted: G        W    
>> 3.8.0upstream-06472-g6661875-dirty #1 Xen HVM domU
>> [   28.134000] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff8110711b>]  [<ffffffff8110711b>] 
>> stop_machine_cpu_stop+0x7b/0xf0

> So the migration thread loops in stop_machine_cpu_stop(). Now the
> interesting question is what work was scheduled for that cpu.

> The main difference between the old code and the new one, is that the
> thread is created earlier and not detroyed on cpu offline.

> Could you add some instrumentation, so we can see what kind of cpu
> stop work is scheduled and from where?

> Thanks,

>         tglx




_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel