Received: by 2002:a25:4158:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o85csp692789yba; Thu, 9 May 2019 04:39:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxxZONPtPvM8jAX7YatC0z40JULG6/cm9SlRtX8anWCqqnAdg7SNAh1z1xS7Uu+jok8zgwU X-Received: by 2002:aa7:8683:: with SMTP id d3mr4235989pfo.145.1557401990680; Thu, 09 May 2019 04:39:50 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1557401990; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=kB/sMTPzAqE4jlFvQCuJqvn3WDJqHVcDZu3q7SZC4Tc02zde+vZhZWTt4sLHT9qcdB ZPUh7vQAys+upOxc92ztmwjxTCUYaJYV4amB56LxH1VvqFklMsgXbICZNnIGng4X+FXK qS+KaXsGqKy7woT/ibtMRY1NIeCVRbS8AGoonM/GnlAiODWx5cbLCXSrtRGpc2HhqZNb RPJeFxIF2LEn0OE4hUizHcXBsnlWYnvfqSp/uTbDspbszTd8x4hzKJZUn1//r+SJVVYl JSTSi7SQYyBlWe1IqVPwIUEqEuEos1c7h/5ThV6qg47GMCaY+paTn+wGLduxcSGGCvRe msDg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:from:cc:references:to :subject; bh=UKrpEfV99Pt8HIsb2MeTGytMt3oHPvD6WLAh9Oj7rCQ=; b=HfFZm2UqowYqoOI3Ff3kQsEi1Z9whfj+59lguABh81kA9scMQBFddiuhg9yw7aAM4h +PDA9YcMqstM4zq2hm783yhjmW7S1+g2JQipOcHJeaYsGRlMeQtVllIuGLZPigg9JaMM 0P0uw4ly3wRsKNicfs2IHHuMOCsoLkmc/T3tsHe0++dTU41KQnYKvI+OJsj8a9/0qwGm uatPgg1WpLhKE7abp+fPtSxiKq0YVmoC7LfrBBe/UNOoAmZKHGi/cmn2qdPIqRQmjY7u fiQkobRKDl9iVut8jNEKovGy2guY8hwVSx3yt1Q60iV1vnL7XWZu+68N44uj5T8wM0dx klRQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id d75si2792852pfm.259.2019.05.09.04.39.34; Thu, 09 May 2019 04:39:50 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726583AbfEILhj (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 9 May 2019 07:37:39 -0400 Received: from szxga07-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.35]:55300 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725963AbfEILhj (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 May 2019 07:37:39 -0400 Received: from DGGEMS409-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 26233D172ACBE7C5A49C; Thu, 9 May 2019 19:37:37 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.177.31.55) by DGGEMS409-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.209) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.439.0; Thu, 9 May 2019 19:37:27 +0800 Subject: Re: ARM/gic-v4: deadlock occurred To: Marc Zyngier References: <9efe0260-4a84-7489-ecdd-2e9561599320@huawei.com> <86lfzl9ofe.wl-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <0b413592-7d98-ebe8-35c5-da330f800326@huawei.com> <86a7fx9lg8.wl-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <4d60d130-b7ce-96cb-5f8a-11e83329601a@huawei.com> <868svg9igl.wl-marc.zyngier@arm.com> CC: , wanghaibin 00208455 , kvmarm From: Heyi Guo Message-ID: <8be3a9f0-f3c5-8874-e7f4-9fc507925153@huawei.com> Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 19:37:28 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <868svg9igl.wl-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.177.31.55] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2019/5/9 15:48, Marc Zyngier wrote: > Hi Heyi, > > On Wed, 08 May 2019 14:01:48 +0100, > Heyi Guo wrote: >> Hi Marc, >> >> The bad news is that though your previous patch fixed the lockdep >> warnings, we can still reproduce soft lockup panics and some other >> exceptions... So our issue may not be related with this lock defect. >> >> Most of the call traces are as below, stuck in smp_call_function_many: >> >> [ 6862.660611] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#27 stuck for 23s! [CPU 18/KVM:95311] >> [ 6862.668283] Modules linked in: ebtable_filter ebtables ip6table_filter ip6_tables iptable_filter vport_vxlan vxlan ip6_udp_tunnel udp_tunnel openvswitch nsh nf_nat_ipv6 nf_nat_ipv4 nf_conncount nf_nat nf_conntrack nf_defrag_ipv6 nf_defrag_ipv4 ib_isert iscsi_target_mod ib_srpt target_core_mod ib_srp scsi_transport_srp ib_ipoib ib_umad rpcrdma sunrpc rdma_ucm ib_uverbs ib_iser rdma_cm iw_cm ib_cm hns_roce_hw_v2 hns_roce aes_ce_blk crypto_simd ib_core cryptd aes_ce_cipher crc32_ce ghash_ce sha2_ce sha256_arm64 sha1_ce marvell ses enclosure hibmc_drm ttm drm_kms_helper drm sg ixgbe mdio fb_sys_fops syscopyarea hns3 hclge sysfillrect hnae3 sysimgblt sbsa_gwdt vhost_net tun vhost tap ip_tables dm_mod megaraid_sas hisi_sas_v3_hw hisi_sas_main ipmi_si ipmi_devintf ipmi_msghandler br_netfilter xt_sctp >> [ 6862.668519] irq event stamp: 1670812 >> [ 6862.668526] hardirqs last enabled at (1670811): [] el1_irq+0xd8/0x180 >> [ 6862.668530] hardirqs last disabled at (1670812): [] el1_irq+0x88/0x180 >> [ 6862.668534] softirqs last enabled at (1661542): [] __do_softirq+0x41c/0x51c >> [ 6862.668539] softirqs last disabled at (1661535): [] irq_exit+0x18c/0x198 >> [ 6862.668544] CPU: 27 PID: 95311 Comm: CPU 18/KVM Kdump: loaded Tainted: G W 4.19.36-1.2.141.aarch64 #1 >> [ 6862.668548] Hardware name: Huawei TaiShan 2280 V2/BC82AMDA, BIOS TA BIOS TaiShan 2280 V2 - B900 01/29/2019 >> [ 6862.668551] pstate: 80400009 (Nzcv daif +PAN -UAO) >> [ 6862.668557] pc : smp_call_function_many+0x360/0x3b8 >> [ 6862.668560] lr : smp_call_function_many+0x320/0x3b8 >> [ 6862.668563] sp : ffff000028f338e0 >> [ 6862.668566] x29: ffff000028f338e0 x28: ffff000009893fb4 >> [ 6862.668575] x27: 0000000000000400 x26: 0000000000000000 >> [ 6862.668583] x25: ffff0000080b1e08 x24: 0000000000000001 >> [ 6862.668591] x23: ffff000009891bc8 x22: ffff000009891bc8 >> [ 6862.668599] x21: ffff805f7d6da408 x20: ffff000009893fb4 >> [ 6862.668608] x19: ffff805f7d6da400 x18: 0000000000000000 >> [ 6862.668616] x17: 0000000000000000 x16: 0000000000000000 >> [ 6862.668624] x15: 0000000000000000 x14: 0000000000000000 >> [ 6862.668632] x13: 0000000000000040 x12: 0000000000000228 >> [ 6862.668640] x11: 0000000000000020 x10: 0000000000000040 >> [ 6862.668648] x9 : 0000000000000000 x8 : 0000000000000010 >> [ 6862.668656] x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : ffff805f7d329660 >> [ 6862.668664] x5 : ffff000028f33850 x4 : 0000000002000402 >> [ 6862.668673] x3 : 0000000000000000 x2 : ffff803f7f3dc678 >> [ 6862.668681] x1 : 0000000000000003 x0 : 000000000000000a >> [ 6862.668689] Call trace: >> [ 6862.668693] smp_call_function_many+0x360/0x3b8 > This would tend to indicate that one of the CPUs isn't responding to > the IPI because it has its interrupts disabled, or has crashed badly > already. Can you check where in smp_call_function_many this is > hanging? My bet is on the wait loop at the end of the function. Yes. > > You'll need to find out what this unresponsive CPU is doing... True; we need to dig more deeply... Appreciate it. Heyi > >> Any idea is appreciated. >> >> We will find some time and board to test your new patch set, but >> right now our top priority is to debug the above issue, so it may >> take some time to get back with the test result. Sorry for that. > No worries, that can wait. > > M. >