lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Apr]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] x86, perf: high volume of events produces a flood of unknown NMIs
On 04/20/2011 10:26 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Arnaldo pointed me at an NMI problem that happens when he tries to
> generate a high volume of perf events. He receives a flood of unknown
> NMIs.
>
> I have been poking at the problem and came up with a patch, but it doesn't
> always work. I was hoping people who understood how the NMI works at a
> low level might be able to help me.
>
> I was able to duplicate this on an AMD Phenom, Pentium 4, Xeon Core2quad,
> and Nehalem. The problem I think is the large generation of back-to-back
> NMIs. The perf nmi handler may accidentally handle some of those
> extra/in-flight NMIs in its first pass, leaving the next NMI to be
> unhandled and generating an unknown NMI message.
>
> Robert included logic to check for two back-to-back NMIs, but that falls
> short when more then three are generated. I modified his logic to account
> for three back-to-back NMIs, but that didn't completely solve the problem.
>
> I took another approach at catching back-to-back NMIs that seemed to work
> on all my machines except for the Xeon core2quad, but I am not entirely
> sure if my approach is valid.
>
> The approach I took was based on the idea that if an NMI is being
> generated while currently in an NMI handler, the current NMI when finished
> won't continue executing the next instruction before the exception but
> instead jump back into another NMI exception frame.
>
> As a result, the args passed in to the NMI handler should have the same ip
> and sp as the previous NMI interrupt. Otherwise one could assume that
> some amount of time passed between interrupts (enough to return from the
> exception and execute code).
>
> I thought this would allow me to trap an infinite number of back-to-back
> NMIs. Like I said it seemed to work in a number of machines, except for
> my Xeon core2quad.
>
> Does anyone know if my approach is a valid one? Or is there a better way
> to catch this condition? Or maybe some other tips or tricks I can use to
> help come up with a solution for this?
>
> Or perhaps we don't care about this because in the end perf can't even
> capture the data without spitting out a CPU Overload message.
>
> Thoughts?
>

Hi Don, just a thought -- since pmi masks lvtpc we could read it and check if it's
masked or no, though I fear it is quite time consuming operation in compare with
frames :( (hmm, intel spec mentions only p4 and xeon as masking lvtpc)
--
Cyrill


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-04-20 20:51    [W:0.297 / U:0.248 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site