Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755833AbZATNHu (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:07:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1761533AbZATNHi (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:07:38 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:39784 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761532AbZATNHg (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:07:36 -0500 Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 14:07:14 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Kevin Shanahan Cc: Avi Kivity , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Kevin Shanahan , Mike Galbraith , Peter Zijlstra , Steven Rostedt , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric?= Weisbecker Subject: Re: [Bug #12465] KVM guests stalling on 2.6.28 (bisected) Message-ID: <20090120130714.GA11048@elte.hu> References: <1232410363.4768.21.camel@kulgan.wumi.org.au> <20090120113546.GA26571@elte.hu> <1232455343.4895.4.camel@kulgan.wumi.org.au> <20090120125652.GA1457@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090120125652.GA1457@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2357 Lines: 61 * Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Kevin Shanahan wrote: > > > > This suggests some sort of KVM-specific problem. Scheduler latencies > > > in the seconds that occur under normal load situations are noticed and > > > reported quickly - and there are no such open regressions currently. > > > > It at least suggests a problem with interaction between the scheduler > > and kvm, otherwise reverting that scheduler patch wouldn't have made the > > regression go away. > > the scheduler affects almost everything, so almost by definition a > scheduler change can tickle a race or other timing bug in just about any > code - and reverting that change in the scheduler can make the bug go > away. But yes, it could also be a genuine scheduler bug - that is always a > possibility. > > Could you please run a cfs-debug-info.sh session on a CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG=y > and CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS=y kernel, while you are experiencing those > latencies: > > http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/tools/cfs-debug-info.sh > > and post that (relatively large) somewhere, or send it as a reply after > bzip2 -9 compressing it? It will include a lot of information about the > delays your tasks are experiencing. Another test would be to build the scheduler latency tracer into your kernel: CONFIG_SCHED_TRACER=y And enable it via: echo wakeup > /debug/tracing/current_tracer and you should be seeing the worst-case scheduling latency traces in /debug/tracing/trace, and the largest observed latency will be in /debug/tracing/tracing_max_latency [in microseconds]. You can reset the max-latency (and thus restart tracing) via: echo 0 > /debug/tracing/tracing_max_latency Latencies up to 100 microseconds are ok. If you see 10 seconds delays there (values of 10,000,000 or more) then it's probably a scheduler bug. Please reproduce the latency under KVM and send us the trace. The trace file will be a lot more verbose and a lot more verbose if you also enable the function tracer (FUNCTION_TRACER, DYNAMIC_FTRACE and FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER). Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/