Enabling SMP support? #252
Comments
|
Isn't that wrong? lkl heavily uses threads for syscalls, kthreads, etc. |
|
@M1cha What Jerry is saying is that we can only run one system call at a time, which, on multi processor systems is limiting the amount of work we can do with one instance. @hkchu some of the work I did for #246 has multiple CPU support in mind (see the "CPU access" patch), although I don't have a strict timeline in mind. The next item on my TODO list is user level threads (for hosts such as UEFI), multi processor support, module support. |
thehajime
pushed a commit
to libos-nuse/lkl-linux
that referenced
this issue
Nov 8, 2017
commit 656d61c upstream. printk_ratelimit() invokes ___ratelimit() which may invoke a normal printk() (pr_warn() in this particular case) to warn about suppressed output. Given that printk_ratelimit() may be called from anywhere, that pr_warn() is dangerous - it may end up deadlocking the system. Fix ___ratelimit() by using deferred printk(). Sasha reported the following lockdep error: : Unregister pv shared memory for cpu 8 : select_fallback_rq: 3 callbacks suppressed : process 8583 (trinity-c78) no longer affine to cpu8 : : ====================================================== : WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected : 4.14.0-rc2-next-20170927+ lkl#252 Not tainted : ------------------------------------------------------ : migration/8/62 is trying to acquire lock: : (&port_lock_key){-.-.}, at: serial8250_console_write() : : but task is already holding lock: : (&rq->lock){-.-.}, at: sched_cpu_dying() : : which lock already depends on the new lock. : : : the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: : : -> #3 (&rq->lock){-.-.}: : __lock_acquire() : lock_acquire() : _raw_spin_lock() : task_fork_fair() : sched_fork() : copy_process.part.31() : _do_fork() : kernel_thread() : rest_init() : start_kernel() : x86_64_start_reservations() : x86_64_start_kernel() : verify_cpu() : : -> #2 (&p->pi_lock){-.-.}: : __lock_acquire() : lock_acquire() : _raw_spin_lock_irqsave() : try_to_wake_up() : default_wake_function() : woken_wake_function() : __wake_up_common() : __wake_up_common_lock() : __wake_up() : tty_wakeup() : tty_port_default_wakeup() : tty_port_tty_wakeup() : uart_write_wakeup() : serial8250_tx_chars() : serial8250_handle_irq.part.25() : serial8250_default_handle_irq() : serial8250_interrupt() : __handle_irq_event_percpu() : handle_irq_event_percpu() : handle_irq_event() : handle_level_irq() : handle_irq() : do_IRQ() : ret_from_intr() : native_safe_halt() : default_idle() : arch_cpu_idle() : default_idle_call() : do_idle() : cpu_startup_entry() : rest_init() : start_kernel() : x86_64_start_reservations() : x86_64_start_kernel() : verify_cpu() : : -> #1 (&tty->write_wait){-.-.}: : __lock_acquire() : lock_acquire() : _raw_spin_lock_irqsave() : __wake_up_common_lock() : __wake_up() : tty_wakeup() : tty_port_default_wakeup() : tty_port_tty_wakeup() : uart_write_wakeup() : serial8250_tx_chars() : serial8250_handle_irq.part.25() : serial8250_default_handle_irq() : serial8250_interrupt() : __handle_irq_event_percpu() : handle_irq_event_percpu() : handle_irq_event() : handle_level_irq() : handle_irq() : do_IRQ() : ret_from_intr() : native_safe_halt() : default_idle() : arch_cpu_idle() : default_idle_call() : do_idle() : cpu_startup_entry() : rest_init() : start_kernel() : x86_64_start_reservations() : x86_64_start_kernel() : verify_cpu() : : -> #0 (&port_lock_key){-.-.}: : check_prev_add() : __lock_acquire() : lock_acquire() : _raw_spin_lock_irqsave() : serial8250_console_write() : univ8250_console_write() : console_unlock() : vprintk_emit() : vprintk_default() : vprintk_func() : printk() : ___ratelimit() : __printk_ratelimit() : select_fallback_rq() : sched_cpu_dying() : cpuhp_invoke_callback() : take_cpu_down() : multi_cpu_stop() : cpu_stopper_thread() : smpboot_thread_fn() : kthread() : ret_from_fork() : : other info that might help us debug this: : : Chain exists of: : &port_lock_key --> &p->pi_lock --> &rq->lock : : Possible unsafe locking scenario: : : CPU0 CPU1 : ---- ---- : lock(&rq->lock); : lock(&p->pi_lock); : lock(&rq->lock); : lock(&port_lock_key); : : *** DEADLOCK *** : : 4 locks held by migration/8/62: : #0: (&p->pi_lock){-.-.}, at: sched_cpu_dying() : #1: (&rq->lock){-.-.}, at: sched_cpu_dying() : #2: (printk_ratelimit_state.lock){....}, at: ___ratelimit() : #3: (console_lock){+.+.}, at: vprintk_emit() : : stack backtrace: : CPU: 8 PID: 62 Comm: migration/8 Not tainted 4.14.0-rc2-next-20170927+ lkl#252 : Call Trace: : dump_stack() : print_circular_bug() : check_prev_add() : ? add_lock_to_list.isra.26() : ? check_usage() : ? kvm_clock_read() : ? kvm_sched_clock_read() : ? sched_clock() : ? check_preemption_disabled() : __lock_acquire() : ? __lock_acquire() : ? add_lock_to_list.isra.26() : ? debug_check_no_locks_freed() : ? memcpy() : lock_acquire() : ? serial8250_console_write() : _raw_spin_lock_irqsave() : ? serial8250_console_write() : serial8250_console_write() : ? serial8250_start_tx() : ? lock_acquire() : ? memcpy() : univ8250_console_write() : console_unlock() : ? __down_trylock_console_sem() : vprintk_emit() : vprintk_default() : vprintk_func() : printk() : ? show_regs_print_info() : ? lock_acquire() : ___ratelimit() : __printk_ratelimit() : select_fallback_rq() : sched_cpu_dying() : ? sched_cpu_starting() : ? rcutree_dying_cpu() : ? sched_cpu_starting() : cpuhp_invoke_callback() : ? cpu_disable_common() : take_cpu_down() : ? trace_hardirqs_off_caller() : ? cpuhp_invoke_callback() : multi_cpu_stop() : ? __this_cpu_preempt_check() : ? cpu_stop_queue_work() : cpu_stopper_thread() : ? cpu_stop_create() : smpboot_thread_fn() : ? sort_range() : ? schedule() : ? __kthread_parkme() : kthread() : ? sort_range() : ? kthread_create_on_node() : ret_from_fork() : process 9121 (trinity-c78) no longer affine to cpu8 : smpboot: CPU 8 is now offline Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170928120405.18273-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com Fixes: 6b1d174 ("ratelimit: extend to print suppressed messages on release") Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> Reported-by: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
LKL is currently single threaded. Does anyone know or have experience enabling SMP on an arch port like LKL? We may have use cases in the near future that requires performance attainable only through the parallel use of multiple CPUs and I wonder how easy/difficult this work may be.
Thanks.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: