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

[Juergen Gross <juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 02/14/11 18:57, George Dunlap wrote:
> The good news is, I've managed to reproduce this on my local test
> hardware with 1x4x2 (1 socket, 4 cores, 2 threads per core) using the
> attached script.  It's time to go home now, but I should be able to
> dig something up tomorrow.
>
> To use the script:
> * Rename cpupool0 to "p0", and create an empty second pool, "p1"
> * You can modify elements by adding "arg=val" as arguments.
> * Arguments are:
>   + dryrun={true,false} Do the work, but don't actually execute any xl
> arguments.  Default false.
>   + left: Number commands to execute.  Default 10.
>   + maxcpus: highest numerical value for a cpu.  Default 7 (i.e., 0-7 is 8 
> cpus).
>   + verbose={true,false} Print what you're doing.  Default is true.
>
> The script sometimes attempts to remove the last cpu from cpupool0; in
> this case, libxl will print an error.  If the script gets an error
> under that condition, it will ignore it; under any other condition, it
> will print diagnostic information.
>
> What finally crashed it for me was this command:
> # ./cpupool-test.sh verbose=false left=1000
Nice!
With your script I finally managed to get the error, too. On my box (2 sockets
a 6 cores) I had to use

./cpupool-test.sh verbose=false left=10000 maxcpus=11

to trigger it.
Looking for more data now...


Juergen

>   -George
>
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 7:39 AM, Andre Przywara<andre.przywara@xxxxxxx>  wrote:
> > Juergen Gross wrote:
> > > On 02/10/11 15:18, Andre Przywara wrote:
> > > > Andre Przywara wrote:
> > > > > On 02/10/2011 07:42 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
> > > > > > On 02/09/11 15:21, Juergen Gross wrote:
> > > > > > > Andre, George,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What seems to be interesting: I think the problem did always occur
> > > > > > > when
> > > > > > > a new cpupool was created and the first cpu was moved to it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think my previous assumption regarding the master_ticker was not
> > > > > > > too bad.
> > > > > > > I think somehow the master_ticker of the new cpupool is becoming
> > > > > > > active
> > > > > > > before the scheduler is really initialized properly. This could
> > > > > > > happen, if
> > > > > > > enough time is spent between alloc_pdata for the cpu to be moved and
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > critical section in schedule_cpu_switch().
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The solution should be to activate the timers only if the scheduler is
> > > > > > > ready for them.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > George, do you think the master_ticker should be stopped in
> > > > > > > suspend_ticker
> > > > > > > as well? I still see potential problems for entering deep C-States.
> > > > > > > I think
> > > > > > > I'll prepare a patch which will keep the master_ticker active for the
> > > > > > > C-State case and migrate it for the schedule_cpu_switch() case.
> > > > > > Okay, here is a patch for this. It ran on my 4-core machine without any
> > > > > > problems.
> > > > > > Andre, could you give it a try?
> > > > > Did, but unfortunately it crashed as always. Tried twice and made sure
> > > > > I booted the right kernel. Sorry.
> > > > > The idea with the race between the timer and the state changing
> > > > > sounded very appealing, actually that was suspicious to me from the
> > > > > beginning.
> > > > >
> > > > > I will add some code to dump the state of all cpupools to the BUG_ON
> > > > > to see in which situation we are when the bug triggers.
> > > > OK, here is a first try of this, the patch iterates over all CPU pools
> > > > and outputs some data if the BUG_ON
> > > > ((sdom->weight * sdom->active_vcpu_count)>  weight_left) condition
> > > > triggers:
> > > > (XEN) CPU pool #0: 1 domains (SMP Credit Scheduler), mask: fffffffc003f
> > > > (XEN) CPU pool #1: 0 domains (SMP Credit Scheduler), mask: fc0
> > > > (XEN) CPU pool #2: 0 domains (SMP Credit Scheduler), mask: 1000
> > > > (XEN) Xen BUG at sched_credit.c:1010
> > > > ....
> > > > The masks look proper (6 cores per node), the bug triggers when the
> > > > first CPU is about to be(?) inserted.
> > > Sure? I'm missing the cpu with mask 2000.
> > > I'll try to reproduce the problem on a larger machine here (24 cores, 4
> > > numa
> > > nodes).
> > > Andre, can you give me your xen boot parameters? Which xen changeset are
> > > you
> > > running, and do you have any additional patches in use?
> > The grub lines:
> > kernel (hd1,0)/boot/xen-22858_debug_04.gz console=com1,vga com1=115200
> > module (hd1,0)/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32.27_pvops console=tty0
> > console=ttyS0,115200 ro root=/dev/sdb1 xencons=hvc0
> >
> > All of my experiments are use c/s 22858 as a base.
> > If you use a AMD Magny-Cours box for your experiments (socket C32 or G34),
> > you should add the following patch (removing the line)
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/traps.c
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/traps.c
> > @@ -803,7 +803,6 @@ static void pv_cpuid(struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
> >          __clear_bit(X86_FEATURE_SKINIT % 32,&c);
> >          __clear_bit(X86_FEATURE_WDT % 32,&c);
> >          __clear_bit(X86_FEATURE_LWP % 32,&c);
> > -        __clear_bit(X86_FEATURE_NODEID_MSR % 32,&c);
> >          __clear_bit(X86_FEATURE_TOPOEXT % 32,&c);
> >          break;
> >      case 5: /* MONITOR/MWAIT */
> >
> > This is not necessary (in fact that reverts my patch c/s 22815), but raises
> > the probability to trigger the bug, probably because it increases the
> > pressure of the Dom0 scheduler. If you cannot trigger it with Dom0, try to
> > create a guest with many VCPUs and squeeze it into a small CPU-pool.
> >
> > Good luck ;-)
> > Andre.
> >
> > --
> > Andre Przywara
> > AMD-OSRC (Dresden)
> > Tel: x29712
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xen-devel mailing list
> > Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xen-devel mailing list
> > Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
--
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