Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757581Ab0BROiG (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2010 09:38:06 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:60482 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757063Ab0BROiC (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2010 09:38:02 -0500 Subject: Re: Stupid futex question - 2.6.33-rc7-mmotm0210 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <10057.1266501862@localhost> References: <10057.1266501862@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:37:59 +0100 Message-ID: <1266503879.26719.702.camel@laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1880 Lines: 37 On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 09:04 -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > Kernel: x86_64 2.6.33-rc7-mmotm0210 > > I'm debugging a problem where pulseaudio is getting killed with a SIGKILL > out of the blue. It appears to be a problem where pulseaudio sets > RLIMIT_RTTIME and the bound gets exceeded. Analysis with 'top' shows > a short spike of 96% system time, and the tail end of strace shows this: > > [pid 25065] 01:50:20.371484 ioctl(28, USBDEVFS_CONTROL, 0x7fd3d76f630c) = 0 <0.000015> > [pid 25065] 01:50:20.371548 ioctl(28, 0x40045532, 0x7fd3d76f636c) = 0 <0.000016> > [pid 25065] 01:50:20.371611 open("/dev/snd/pcmC0D0p", O_RDWR|O_NONBLOCK|O_CLOEXEC > [pid 25064] 01:50:20.371678 <... write resumed> ) = 8 <0.002104> > [pid 25064] 01:50:20.371718 futex(0xc2ec00, FUTEX_WAIT_PRIVATE, 0, NULL > [pid 25066] 01:50:21.408392 +++ killed by SIGKILL +++ > PANIC: handle_group_exit: 25066 leader 25064 > [pid 25065] 01:50:21.408442 +++ killed by SIGKILL +++ > PANIC: handle_group_exit: 25065 leader 25064 > 01:50:21.420354 +++ killed by SIGKILL +++ > > thread 25064 apparently gets gunned down due to RTTIME because it spent a whole > second in a futex() call - is it reasonable for futex() to not return for that > long? > > In other words - kernel bug because futex() should return, or pulseaudio bug > for not understanding futex() can snooze a while? > > If a kernel bug, anybody got a better idea than nuking the RLIMIT_RTTIME call, > waiting for it to repeat (takes between 1 minute and 1 hour or so), and > whomping it a few times with sysrq-T? is that second spend in processing sysrq-t? -- 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/