lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Dec]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Fix spurious hard lockup events while in debugger
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:22:18AM -0700, Jeff Merkey wrote:
> On 12/14/15, Jeff Merkey <linux.mdb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The current touch_nmi_watchdog() function in /kernel/watchdog.c does
> > not always catch all cases when a processor is spinning in the nmi
> > handler inside either KGDB, KDB, or MDB, in particular, the case where
> > a processor is being held by a debugger inside an int1 handler.
> >
> > The hrtimer_interrupts_saved count can still end up matching the
> > hrtime value in some cases, resulting in the hard lockup detector
> > tagging processors inside a debugger and executing a panic.
> >
> > The patch below corrects this problem. I did not add this to
> > the touch_nmi_function directly becuase of possible affects on
> > timing issues since the function is widely used by drivers and
> > modules.
> >
> > I have tested this patch and it fixes the problem for kernel debuggers
> > stopping errant hard lockup events when processors are spinning inside
> > the debugger.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jeff Merkey <linux.mdb@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > kernel/watchdog.c | 7 +++++++
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
> > index 18f34cf..b682aab 100644
> > --- a/kernel/watchdog.c
> > +++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
> > @@ -283,6 +283,13 @@ static bool is_hardlockup(void)
> > __this_cpu_write(hrtimer_interrupts_saved, hrint);
> > return false;
> > }
> > +
> > +void touch_hardlockup_watchdog(void)
> > +{
> > + __this_cpu_write(hrtimer_interrupts_saved, 0);
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(touch_hardlockup_watchdog);
> > +
> > #endif
> >
> > static int is_softlockup(unsigned long touch_ts)
> > --
> > 1.8.3.1
> >
> >
>
> I got to the bottom of it. It's related to the hardware I am using.
> One of the processors is faulting and hanging due to an existing bug
> in the hw_breakpoint handler not setting the resume flag (I have
> previously reported it and submitted a patch). This breaks your code,
> but there's nothing you can do about it.
>
> There is a severe bug in hw_breakpoint.c that causes int1 recursion
> and this whole "lazy debug register switching" nonsense does not work
> properly. I am probably the first person to actually test this code
> path robustly. I applied the patch that fixes this bug in
> hw_breakpoint.c and the problem with your code firing off and ignoring
> the touch flag
> went away.

Ah, good to know. Thanks! I'll drop this patch then.

Cheers,
Don


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-12-16 19:21    [W:0.067 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site