Re: [Xen-devel] Hypervisor crash(!) on xl cpupool-numa-split

[Juergen Gross <juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 02/01/11 17:32, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I asked Stephan Diestelhorst for help and after I convinced him that
> removing credit and making SEDF the default again is not an option he
> worked together with me on that ;-) Many thanks for that!
> We haven't come to a final solution but could gather some debug data.
> I will simply dump some data here, maybe somebody has got a clue. We
> will work further on this tomorrow.
>
> First I replaced the BUG_ON with some printks to get some insight:
> (XEN) sdom->active_vcpu_count: 18
> (XEN) sdom->weight: 256
> (XEN) weight_left: 4096, weight_total: 4096
> (XEN) credit_balance: 0, credit_xtra: 0, credit_cap: 0
> (XEN) Xen BUG at sched_credit.c:591
> (XEN) ----[ Xen-4.1.0-rc2-pre x86_64 debug=y Not tainted ]----
>
> So that one shows that the number of VCPUs is not up-to-date with the
> computed weight sum, we have seen a difference of one or two VCPUs (in
> this case here the weight has been computed from 16 VCPUs). Also it
> shows that the assertion kicks in in the first iteration of the loop,
> where weight_left and weight_total are still equal.
>
> So I additionally instrumented alloc_pdata and free_pdata, the
> unprefixed lines come from a shell script mimicking the functionality of
> cpupool-numa-split.
> ------------
> Removing CPUs from Pool 0
> Creating new pool
> Using config file "cpupool.test"
> cpupool name: Pool-node6
> scheduler: credit
> number of cpus: 1
> (XEN) adding CPU 36, now 1 CPUs
> (XEN) removing CPU 36, remaining: 17
> Populating new pool
> (XEN) sdom->active_vcpu_count: 9
> (XEN) sdom->weight: 256
> (XEN) weight_left: 2048, weight_total: 2048
> (XEN) credit_balance: 0, credit_xtra: 0, credit_cap: 0
> (XEN) adding CPU 37, now 2 CPUs
> (XEN) removing CPU 37, remaining: 16
> (XEN) adding CPU 38, now 3 CPUs
> (XEN) removing CPU 38, remaining: 15
> (XEN) adding CPU 39, now 4 CPUs
> (XEN) removing CPU 39, remaining: 14
> (XEN) adding CPU 40, now 5 CPUs
> (XEN) removing CPU 40, remaining: 13
> (XEN) sdom->active_vcpu_count: 17
> (XEN) sdom->weight: 256
> (XEN) weight_left: 4096, weight_total: 4096
> (XEN) credit_balance: 0, credit_xtra: 0, credit_cap: 0
> (XEN) adding CPU 41, now 6 CPUs
> (XEN) removing CPU 41, remaining: 12
> ...
> Two thing startled me:
> 1) There is quite some between the "Removing CPUs" message from the
> script and the actual HV printk showing it's done, why is that not
> synchronous?
Removing cpus from Pool-0 requires no switching of the scheduler, so you
see no calls of alloc/free_pdata here.

> Looking at the code it shows that
> __csched_vcpu_acct_start() is eventually triggered by a timer, shouldn't
> that be triggered synchronously by add/removal events?
The vcpus are not moved explicitly, they are migrated by the normal
scheduler mechanisms, same as for vcpu-pin.

> 2) It clearly shows that each CPU gets added to the new pool _before_ it
> gets removed from the old one (Pool-0), isn't that violating the "only
> one pool per CPU" rule? Even it that is fine for a short period of time,
> maybe the timer kicks in in this very moment resulting in violated
> invariants?
The sequence you are seeing seems to be okay. The alloc_pdata for the new pool
is called before the free_pdata for the old pool.

And the timer is not relevant, as only the idle vcpu should be running on the
moving cpu and the accounting stuff is never called during idle.



Juergen

--
Juergen Gross                 Principal Developer Operating Systems
TSP ES&S SWE OS6                       Telephone: +49 (0) 89 3222 2967
Fujitsu Technology Solutions              e-mail: juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Domagkstr. 28                           Internet: ts.fujitsu.com
D-80807 Muenchen                 Company details: ts.fujitsu.com/imprint.html

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel