lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateTue, 26 Aug 2008 12:03:35 -0700
FromMike Travis <>
SubjectRe: [Bug #11342] Linux 2.6.27-rc3: kernel BUG at mm/vmalloc.c - bisected
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>> checkstack.pl shows these things as the top problems:
>>>
>>> 	0xffffffff80266234 smp_call_function_mask [vmlinux]:    2736
>>> 	0xffffffff80234747 __build_sched_domains [vmlinux]:     2232
>>> 	0xffffffff8023523f __build_sched_domains [vmlinux]:     2232
>>>
>>> Anyway, the reason smp_call_function_mask and friends have such _huge_ 
>>> stack usages for you is that they contain a 'cpumask_t' on the stack.
>> In fact, they contain multiple CPU-masks, each 4k-bits - 512 bytes - in 
>> size. And they tend to call each other.
>>
>> Quite frankly, I don't think we were really ready for 4k CPU's. I'm 
>> going to commit this patch to make sure others don't do that many 
>> CPU's by mistake. It marks MAXCPU's as being 'broken' so you cannot 
>> select it, and also limits the number of CPU's that you _can_ select 
>> to "just" 512.
> 
> yeah, that's OK i guess - distros can still enable 4K support if they 
> wish to. Someone interested in improving the stack footprint situation 
> should dust off the max-stack-footprint tracer so that we can catch 
> these things in a more structured way.
> 
> And i guess the next generation of 4K CPUs support should just get away 
> from cpumask_t-on-kernel-stack model altogether, as the current model is 
> not maintainable. We tried the on-kernel-stack variant, and it really 
> does not work reliably. We can fix this in v2.6.28.
> 
> 	Ingo

I would be most interested in any tools to analyze call-trees and
accumulated stack usages.  My current method of using kdb is really
time consuming.

Thanks!
Mike


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-08-26 21:07    [from the cache]
©2003-2008