lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 2.6.27-rc6 xen soft lockup
Rambaldi wrote:
> The machine has two Intel(R) Xeon(R) E5420's so that gives a total of
> 8 cpu's
> During the time of the lockup the cpu load, as measured with cacti,
> was about 4%
> with a increase to 15% at the time the BUG was triggered. So I would
> say mostly idle
> but not very idle.

So that's the cpu load within the domain? How about the overall system
load? What other domains are running?

>
> > Did anything fail or misbehave?
> No nothing failed or misbehaved (as far as I could tell)
>
> With dynticks I guess you mean: CONFIG_NO_HZ ; this option is not set.

(In general its a good idea to set it for virtual machines, to avoid
spuriously scheduling vcpus.)

> I have attached my .config. I have also attached the output of
> (date ; cat /proc/interrupts ; sleep 10 ; date ; cat /proc/interrupts
> )> /tmp/interrupts
> to give an impression about the number of interrupts after 11:30 hours
> of uptime.

Well, there were 1001 interrupts on cpu 1 in that interval, which shows
that the timer interrupts are going at full rate on the idle cpu.

I'm a bit confused. I'm not sure what would trigger a lockup at that
point, unless it really stopped taking interrupts for a while.
Unfortunately the RIP and backtrace are not particularly helpful. I'm
assuming the message is spurious, and indicates some other kind of
timekeeping bug.

> Any other info that you need?

Full dmesg output, for completeness.

J


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-09-10 21:27    [W:0.069 / U:0.364 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site