On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 12:58 PM, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 08/01/2018 05:03 PM, James Bottomley wrote: >> >> On Thu, 2018-08-02 at 07:57 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 7:47 AM, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 03:52:45PM -0700, James Bottomley wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, 2018-08-01 at 15:48 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 05:58:52PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Changes since 20180731: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The pci tree gained a conflict against the pci-current tree. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The net-next tree gained a conflict against the bpf tree. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The block tree lost its build failure. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The staging tree still had its build failure due to an >>>>>>> interaction >>>>>>> with >>>>>>> the vfs tree for which I disabled CONFIG_EROFS_FS. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The kspp tree lost its build failure. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 10070 >>>>>>> 9137 files changed, 417605 insertions(+), 179996 deletions(- >>>>>>> ) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> ------ >>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The widespread kernel hang issues are still seen. I managed >>>>>> to bisect it after working around the transient build failures. >>>>>> Bisect log is attached below. Unfortunately, it doesn't help >>>>>> much. >>>>>> The culprit is reported as: >>>>>> >>>>>> 2d542828c5e9 Merge remote-tracking branch 'scsi/for-next' >>>>>> >>>>>> The preceding merge, >>>>>> >>>>>> 453f1d821165 Merge remote-tracking branch 'cgroup/for-next' >>>>>> >>>>>> checks out fine, as does the tip of scsi-next (commit >>>>>> 103c7b7e0184, >>>>>> "Merge branch 'misc' into for-next"). No idea how to proceed. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This sounds like you may have a problem with this patch: >>>>> >>>>> commit d5038a13eca72fb216c07eb717169092e92284f1 >>>>> Author: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@xxxxxxx> >>>>> Date: Wed Jul 4 10:53:56 2018 +0200 >>>>> >>>>> scsi: core: switch to scsi-mq by default >>>>> >>>>> To verify, boot with the additional kernel parameter >>>>> >>>>> scsi_mod.use_blk_mq=0 >>>>> >>>>> Which will reverse the effect of the above patch. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, that fixes the problem. >>> >>> >>> That may not the root cause, given this issue is only started to >>> see from next-20180731, but d5038a13eca7 (scsi: core: switch to >>> scsi-mq by default) >>> has been in -next for quite a while. >>> >>> Seems something new causes this issue. >> >> >> Read my other email about how to find this. >> >> https://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=153316446223676 >> >> Now that we've confirmed the issue, Gunter, could you attempt to bisect >> it as that email describes? >> > > So, I am more and more baffled. > > I ran another round of bisect, this time each test executing twice, > once with "scsi_mod.use_blk_mq=1" and once with "scsi_mod.use_blk_mq=0", > requiring both to pass. Bisect still points to the merge as culprit. > > Ok, one step further: Actually _revert_ commit d5038a13eca72 before running > each test, meaning the default is use_blk_mq=0. Still run both tests. > Bisect _still_ points to the merge of scsi-next as culprit. > > So, to me it looks like the problem is triggered by _something_ in > scsi-next, combined with _something_ in -next prior to the merge, > not specifically associated with use_blk_mq=[0|1] or d5038a13eca72, > but to a combination of some patch in scsi-next and some other patch. Today I am a bit busy, and not trace it much. So far, I found the code hangs in scsi_test_unit_ready() <-get_capabilities()<-sr_probe(), and scsi_queue_rq()/ata_scsi_queuecmd() has queued the command successfully, but never completed. Also tried to revert commits merged to ata tree on 30th, 31th, but no difference. Thanks, Ming Lei -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
