Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932460Ab0LHBrs (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Dec 2010 20:47:48 -0500 Received: from mail-wy0-f174.google.com ([74.125.82.174]:58331 "EHLO mail-wy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932172Ab0LHBro convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Dec 2010 20:47:44 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=KyzEzOy8cvJWCU622em2es4hLC6nxgQDIpJ0op5EDI1HNc4lDNTQ6EvngaHwGqKb9Y 5xrVay4enmvITxpOUK0V81HUJE0eZszABmkYBy8edsX75WQr5lGwbiZzAc9u0KV0VYqC S78+yVISkKMr5TPaIOLJnibLqxoMyYotzmNj0= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20101207215653.GA25864@dastard> References: <20101207215653.GA25864@dastard> Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 12:47:42 +1100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/46] rcu-walk and dcache scaling From: Nick Piggin To: Dave Chinner Cc: Nick Piggin , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3816 Lines: 79 On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 09:15:58PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: >> >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/npiggin/linux-npiggin.git vfs-scale-working >> >> Here is an new set of vfs patches for review, not that there was much interest >> last time they were posted. It is structured like: >> >> * preparation patches >> * introduce new locks to take over dcache_lock, then remove it >> * cleaning up and reworking things for new locks >> * rcu-walk path walking >> * start on some fine grained locking steps > > Stress test doing: > > ? ? ? ?single thread 50M inode create > ? ? ? ?single thread rm -rf > ? ? ? ?2-way 50M inode create > ? ? ? ?2-way rm -rf > ? ? ? ?4-way 50M inode create > ? ? ? ?4-way rm -rf > ? ? ? ?8-way 50M inode create > ? ? ? ?8-way rm -rf > ? ? ? ?8-way 250M inode create > ? ? ? ?8-way rm -rf > > Failed about 5 minutes into the "4-way rm -rf" (~3 hours into the test) > with a CPU stuck spinning on here: > > [37372.084012] NMI backtrace for cpu 5 > [37372.084012] CPU 5 > [37372.084012] Modules linked in: > [37372.084012] > [37372.084012] Pid: 15214, comm: rm Not tainted 2.6.37-rc4-dgc+ #797 /Bochs > [37372.084012] RIP: 0010:[] ?[] __ticket_spin_lock+0x14/0x20 > [37372.084012] RSP: 0018:ffff880114643c98 ?EFLAGS: 00000213 > [37372.084012] RAX: 0000000000008801 RBX: ffff8800687be6c0 RCX: ffff8800c4eb2688 > [37372.084012] RDX: ffff880114643d38 RSI: ffff8800dfd4ea80 RDI: ffff880114643d14 > [37372.084012] RBP: ffff880114643c98 R08: 0000000000000003 R09: 0000000000000000 > [37372.084012] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: dead000000200200 R12: ffff880114643d14 > [37372.084012] R13: ffff880114643cb8 R14: ffff880114643d38 R15: ffff8800687be71c > [37372.084012] FS: ?00007fd6d7c93700(0000) GS:ffff8800dfd40000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 > [37372.084012] CS: ?0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 000000008005003b > [37372.084012] CR2: 0000000000bbd108 CR3: 0000000107146000 CR4: 00000000000006e0 > [37372.084012] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 > [37372.084012] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 > [37372.084012] Process rm (pid: 15214, threadinfo ffff880114642000, task ffff88011b16f890) > [37372.084012] Stack: > [37372.084012] ?ffff880114643ca8 ffffffff81ad044e ffff880114643cf8 ffffffff81167ae7 > [37372.084012] ?0000000000000000 ffff880114643d38 000000000000000e ffff88011901d800 > [37372.084012] ?ffff8800cdb7cf5c ffff88011901d8e0 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 > [37372.084012] Call Trace: > [37372.084012] ?[] _raw_spin_lock+0xe/0x20 > [37372.084012] ?[] shrink_dentry_list+0x47/0x370 > [37372.084012] ?[] __shrink_dcache_sb+0x14e/0x1e0 > [37372.084012] ?[] shrink_dcache_parent+0x276/0x2d0 > [37372.084012] ?[] ? _raw_spin_lock+0xe/0x20 > [37372.084012] ?[] dentry_unhash+0x42/0x80 > [37372.084012] ?[] vfs_rmdir+0x68/0x100 > [37372.084012] ?[] do_rmdir+0x113/0x130 > [37372.084012] ?[] ? filp_close+0x5d/0x90 > [37372.084012] ?[] sys_unlinkat+0x35/0x40 > [37372.084012] ?[] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b OK good, with any luck, that's the same bug. Is this XFS? Is there any concurrent activity happening on the same dentries? Ie. are the rm -rf threads running on the same directories, or is there any reclaim happening in the background? Thanks, Nick -- 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/