Received: by 2002:a25:e74b:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id e72csp758897ybh; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 07:18:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyxRrkUL8DEdOGfyJYd9t2ve1g8tGFz4M84ZH+NIxY1MNLyKPO9sYC7PyEvcz/F3mgVbO1l X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:d106:: with SMTP id b6mr26490077ejz.125.1595341121719; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 07:18:41 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1595341121; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=OFevxlp2FERi0Z2d+nJnhEig0lJmWlV5eQDGON91KYuSxP40jqeuDA8NsSmH1mQdhb m5NyirSuXP5Mq41XL6RT0jfX0qREsKUQkd7M5IP2NkMmnS+ThDf8E8E0n06twwP/Zout 4VlIk6PvjR0+pOUtsZp2M67unYHfZwwZjIfdYRhnNnzlkbsdBbUZURRG9mW3GwmGXztg C8XtX+xxLOk4jTMAW7jCT7vzmNEgUTDHwqxX9dYbiW511x8VC5zH/emWNnmzHIUOStyd q6kE4B4Z9ugu6XgcCblUSqo4p+Ovdy/vPPlVVrSTgdcfLTqENJYgTswK2+V1bcE58bUH ImtQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=b6DsrydUx/QbWN78Y98wqygG+UFPG4/2noyfDIXaO1Q=; b=DOgoFkmDy5aLDbtrwpkrZMqDLTi2lzhiGEkHR4wDf6O5DPkBwX9CII7wWuuyFW5fJT 2m7Aoij0V1H+dMwuUjWDv3474o1GgaxewIu009QqQ59za9AE5YMeDIxzwk/5mwYmnI+7 foXRMuxvf7GgYEDlnhpqfXK3xYxXadT75gjm7iDmDHKBBGELdBbOxQRXA8PUVXUar6Jr 6BwYMpdDrBdqfM5nLe4M/mmqreCTcOAfgvKq7KF0OnmaBSg05Bw3/sRxi20FJRzzJEMn I91y8hgUouZKnvahRxgT7T3r/7CNy5eLOQ1RuOF0SiezZ2xgDOyZo0tdeeCBT0CATLPW BRBw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@lca.pw header.s=google header.b=ZeZv+Jdt; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id m27si12144551eja.699.2020.07.21.07.18.18; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 07:18:41 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@lca.pw header.s=google header.b=ZeZv+Jdt; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728547AbgGUOPr (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 21 Jul 2020 10:15:47 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52122 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728153AbgGUOPr (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jul 2020 10:15:47 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-x844.google.com (mail-qt1-x844.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::844]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B7DFC061794 for ; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 07:15:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt1-x844.google.com with SMTP id 6so16234790qtt.0 for ; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 07:15:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lca.pw; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=b6DsrydUx/QbWN78Y98wqygG+UFPG4/2noyfDIXaO1Q=; b=ZeZv+Jdtru6aShCxXC4eqO2mhQMefh/NCT5gkoNuHTTZwabuZDWwtppyuS6d25xekJ sHztR8j1lD58bJRXUNNGbqX040tfash+UO3yAkZacwVAlQmKqA0BXNxXQzXFvG2kSxxs MOgPzq1gZwSNKNYQhRW0CiybWUYUcunJo0fgn51nvq3HfhldSs8EPHVnA8n0QerBMuVh KUM6i68yf62YhirYLafdiJMqlQBtnWS+b9pkUEX8ae9+8qpXoHoaXbWAMbLko7hjeLwT K580ksu8g6TcNb7oF2sTrRV6NvWYkwrKdTW9LLXufvWhwa8D0oLUWQHpsKfF0JSZhDit sFCA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=b6DsrydUx/QbWN78Y98wqygG+UFPG4/2noyfDIXaO1Q=; b=eCZtTkcU38rMokbaq64XuRBt7aDRpwjHYeX0vnHBh7cPW9bpodkMxmweb9BlPY22iv 3vsKDqG2SAPbxDeyBcvdZdIHoXkr4roR+/LlKzzpM9xeYe8+I5kxegGkMtETL44+2ncA xgR3ZPiuHId0fyHnOUB1OPI44e+k5E3PhX22Zb9cdKatVL71mvN3eYaDIBk+NQsPI+0C ckhT74w3ermiHR9f2wQwrSfj2zfruaCa4Q61gEgVASweu4A52MYQFSd4cDG/8RvFGJ8A 4JZSqMU//qBNh0G+OfYHsh+ybyOywHA5KQdM4t17rzb5f5DpQPAAp3CsBMQu2uhfuvhC 93Ww== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533gTKO7pp0f0ObzKhnDIXpdx6F2CEeX2E7k9OtmWapzcV5wtxfs yIJdD/9Fn2zqID1RUnHkRuNSWQ== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4c88:: with SMTP id j8mr28146774qtv.57.1595340946182; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 07:15:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lca.pw (pool-71-184-117-43.bstnma.fios.verizon.net. [71.184.117.43]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h185sm2531667qkf.85.2020.07.21.07.15.45 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 21 Jul 2020 07:15:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 10:15:39 -0400 From: Qian Cai To: Michal Hocko Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , Tim Chen Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: silence soft lockups from unlock_page Message-ID: <20200721141539.GA3696@lca.pw> References: <20200721112529.GJ4061@dhcp22.suse.cz> <664A07B6-DBCD-4520-84F1-241A4E7A339F@lca.pw> <20200721121752.GK4061@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20200721132343.GA4261@lca.pw> <20200721133835.GL4061@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20200721133835.GL4061@dhcp22.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 03:38:35PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 21-07-20 09:23:44, Qian Cai wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 02:17:52PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Tue 21-07-20 07:44:07, Qian Cai wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 21, 2020, at 7:25 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Are these really important? I believe I can dig that out from the bug > > > > > report but I didn't really consider that important enough. > > > > > > > > Please dig them out. We have also been running those things on > > > > “large” powerpc as well and never saw such soft-lockups. Those > > > > details may give us some clues about the actual problem. > > > > > > I strongly suspect this is not really relevant but just FYI this is > > > 16Node, 11.9TB with 1536CPUs system. > > > > Okay, we are now talking about the HPC special case. Just brain-storming some > > ideas here. > > > > > > 1) What about increase the soft-lockup threshold early at boot and restore > > afterwards? As far as I can tell, those soft-lockups are just a few bursts of > > things and then cure itself after the booting. > > Is this really better option than silencing soft lockup from the code > itself? What if the same access pattern happens later on? It is better because it does not require a code change? Did your customers see the similar soft-lockups after booting was done?