On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 03:48:15PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Dec 2017, Alexandru Chirvasitu wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 12:00:47PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > Ok, lets take a step back. The bisect/kexec attempts led us away from the
> > > initial problem which is the machine locking up after login, right?
> > >
> >
> > Yes; sorry about that..
>
> Nothing to be sorry about.
>
> > x86/vector: Replace the raw_spin_lock() with
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
> > index 7504491..e5bab02 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
> > @@ -726,6 +726,7 @@ static int apic_set_affinity(struct irq_data *irqd,
> > const struct cpumask *dest, bool force)
> > {
> > struct apic_chip_data *apicd = apic_chip_data(irqd);
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > int err;
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -740,13 +741,13 @@ static int apic_set_affinity(struct irq_data *irqd,
> > (apicd->is_managed || apicd->can_reserve))
> > return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK;
> >
> > - raw_spin_lock(&vector_lock);
> > + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&vector_lock, flags);
> > cpumask_and(vector_searchmask, dest, cpu_online_mask);
> > if (irqd_affinity_is_managed(irqd))
> > err = assign_managed_vector(irqd, vector_searchmask);
> > else
> > err = assign_vector_locked(irqd, vector_searchmask);
> > - raw_spin_unlock(&vector_lock);
> > + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vector_lock, flags);
> > return err ? err : IRQ_SET_MASK_OK;
> > }
> >
> > With this, I still get the lockup messages after login, but not the
> > freezes!
>
> That's really interesting. There should be no code path which calls into
> that with interrupts enabled. I assume you never ran that kernel with
> CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y.
>
Correct. That option is not set in .config.
> Find below a debug patch which should show us the call chain for that
> case. Please apply that on top of Dou's patch so the machine stays
> accessible. Plain output from dmesg is sufficient.
>
> > The lockups register in the log, which I am attaching (see below for
> > attachment naming conventions).
>
> Hmm. That's RCU lockups and that backtrace on the CPU which gets the stall
> looks very familiar. I'd like to see the above result first and then I'll
> send you another pile of patches which might cure that RCU issue.
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
>
> 8<-------------------
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/vector.c
> @@ -729,6 +729,8 @@ static int apic_set_affinity(struct irq_
> unsigned long flags;
> int err;
>
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(!irqs_disabled());
> +
> /*
> * Core code can call here for inactive interrupts. For inactive
> * interrupts which use managed or reservation mode there is no
>
>
>
Bit of a step back here: the kernel treated with Dou's patch no longer
logs me in reliably as before, with or without this newest patch on
top..
So now I sometimes get immediate lockups and freezes upon trying to
log in, and other times I get logged in but get a freeze seconds
later.
In no case can I roam around long nough to get a dmesg, and I no
longer get the non-freezing lockups from before. I can't imagine what
I could possibly have changed..
Here's the output of `git log --pretty=oneline -5` on the branch I'm
working in.
--------------------
f2c02af5cc1d620c039b21fab0ca5948a06daf90 2nd tglx patch
7715575170bacf3566d400b9f2210a10ce152880 x86/vector: Replace the raw_spin_lock() with raw_spin_lock_irqsave()
8d9d56caf33d78bfe6b6087767b1b84acee58458 x86-32: fix kexec with stack canary (CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR)
a197e9dea4ccb72e1a6457fac15329bd5319e719 irq/matrix: Remove the overused BUGON() in irq_matrix_assign_system()
464e1d5f23cca236b930ef068c328a64cab78fb1 Linux 4.15-rc5
--------------------
7715575170bacf3566d400b9f2210a10ce152880, which is the kernel with
Dou's patch, logged me in and allowed me to produce the dmesg from
before. I did this a couple of times back then. I no longer can, for
some reason, as it's reverted back to the no-go lockups from before.
And the next one, f2c02af5cc1d620c039b21fab0ca5948a06daf90, where I
applied the patch you just sent, behaves identically.
