On 2015-12-02 00:41, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
On 12/01/2015 06:30 PM, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
On 2015-12-02 00:19, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
On 12/01/2015 06:00 PM, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
On 2015-12-01 23:47, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
On 11/30/2015 05:55 PM, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
On 2015-11-30 23:54, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
On 11/30/2015 04:46 PM, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
On 2015-11-30 22:45, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 04:47:43PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom
wrote:
Hi all,
I have just tested a 4.4-rc2 kernel (current linus tree) + the
tip tree
pulled on top.
Running this kernel under Xen on PV-guests with multiple vcpus
goes well (on
idle < 10% cpu usage),
but a guest with only a single vcpu doesn't idle at all, it
seems a kworker
thread is stuck:
root 569 98.0 0.0 0 0 ? R 16:02 12:47
[kworker/0:1]
Running a 4.3 kernel works fine with a single vpcu, bisecting
would probably
quite painful since there were some breakages this merge
window with respect
to Xen pv-guests.
There are some differences in the diff's from booting a 4.3,
4.4-single,
4.4-multi cpu boot:
Boris has been tracking a bunch of them. I am attaching the
latest set of
patches I've to carry on top of v4.4-rc3.
Hi Konrad,
i will test those, see if it fixes all my issues and report back
They shouldn't help you ;-( (and I just saw a message from you
confirming this)
The first one fixes a 32-bit bug (on bare metal too). The second
fixes
a fatal bug for 32-bit PV guests. The other two are code
improvements/cleanup.
One of these patches also fixes a bug i was having with a
pci-passthrough device in
a HVM that wasn't working (depending on which dom0-kernel i was
using (4.3 or 4.4)),
but didn't report yet.
Fingers crossed but i think this pv-guest single vcpu issue is the
last i'm troubled by for now ;)
I could not reproduce this, including with your kernel config file.
Hmm that's unpleasant :-\
Hmm other strange thing is it doesn't seem to affect dom0 (which is
also a PV guest), but only unprivileged ones
All unprivileged pv-guests seem to have the irq issue, but only with
a single vcpu i see to get the stuck kworker thread that got my
attention, with a 2 vcpu that doesn't seem to happen, but you still
get the dmesg output and warnings about hvc)
Could it be that:
arch/x86/include/asm/i8259.h
static inline int nr_legacy_irqs(void)
{
return legacy_pic->nr_legacy_irqs;
}
returns something different in some circumstances ?
It should return 16 pre-8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8 and
0
after that commit.
This is the last number that you see in
NR_IRQS:4352 nr_irqs:48 0
line.
I think you should be able to safely revert both
b4ff8389ed14b849354b59ce9b360bdefcdbf99c and
8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8 and see if it makes any
difference.
-boris
That was already underway compiling :)
And it does reveal that reverting both fixes the issue, no stuck
kworker thread .. and no:
genirq: Flags mismatch irq 8. 00000000 (hvc_console) vs. 00000000
(rtc0)
hvc_open: request_irq failed with rc -16.
Let me try it again tomorrow. Can you post your guest config file, Xen
version and host HW (Intel or AMD)? 'xl info' maybe?
-boris
Hi Boris,
A fresh new day .. a fresh new thought.
If i look at the /proc/interrupts from a broken and a kernel with both
commits the
thing that catches the eye is irq8, just as the dmesg message was
telling.
In my PV guest rtc0 now seems to try and take irq8 that was already
assigned to HVC ?
Sounds like some assumptions around the legacy range are broken
somewhere.
What is the benefit of not just reserving the legacy range ?
Attached the /proc/interrupts from both boots.
--
Sander
What i did get was an conflict reverting
b4ff8389ed14b849354b59ce9b360bdefcdbf99c:
arch/arm64/include/asm/irq.h, although that shouldn't matter because
we are on x86 and not on arm.
-- Sander
-- Sander
-boris
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
CPU0
16: 315536 xen-percpu-virq timer0
17: 0 xen-percpu-ipi spinlock0
18: 0 xen-percpu-ipi resched0
19: 0 xen-percpu-ipi callfunc0
20: 0 xen-percpu-virq debug0
21: 0 xen-percpu-ipi callfuncsingle0
22: 0 xen-percpu-ipi irqwork0
23: 346 xen-dyn-event xenbus
24: 134 xen-dyn-event hvc_console
25: 11464 xen-dyn-event blkif
26: 28710 xen-dyn-event eth0-q0-tx
27: 40136 xen-dyn-event eth0-q0-rx
NMI: 0 Non-maskable interrupts
LOC: 0 Local timer interrupts
SPU: 0 Spurious interrupts
PMI: 0 Performance monitoring interrupts
IWI: 0 IRQ work interrupts
RTR: 0 APIC ICR read retries
RES: 0 Rescheduling interrupts
CAL: 0 Function call interrupts
TLB: 0 TLB shootdowns
TRM: 0 Thermal event interrupts
THR: 0 Threshold APIC interrupts
DFR: 0 Deferred Error APIC interrupts
MCE: 0 Machine check exceptions
MCP: 0 Machine check polls
ERR: 0
MIS: 0
PIN: 0 Posted-interrupt notification event
PIW: 0 Posted-interrupt wakeup event
CPU0
0: 29053 xen-percpu-virq timer0
1: 0 xen-percpu-ipi spinlock0
2: 0 xen-percpu-ipi resched0
3: 0 xen-percpu-ipi callfunc0
4: 0 xen-percpu-virq debug0
5: 0 xen-percpu-ipi callfuncsingle0
6: 0 xen-percpu-ipi irqwork0
7: 342 xen-dyn-event xenbus
8: 140 xen-dyn-event rtc0
9: 3238 xen-dyn-event blkif
10: 119 xen-dyn-event eth0-q0-tx
11: 199 xen-dyn-event eth0-q0-rx
NMI: 0 Non-maskable interrupts
LOC: 0 Local timer interrupts
SPU: 0 Spurious interrupts
PMI: 0 Performance monitoring interrupts
IWI: 0 IRQ work interrupts
RTR: 0 APIC ICR read retries
RES: 0 Rescheduling interrupts
CAL: 0 Function call interrupts
TLB: 0 TLB shootdowns
TRM: 0 Thermal event interrupts
THR: 0 Threshold APIC interrupts
DFR: 0 Deferred Error APIC interrupts
MCE: 0 Machine check exceptions
MCP: 0 Machine check polls
ERR: 0
MIS: 0
PIN: 0 Posted-interrupt notification event
PIW: 0 Posted-interrupt wakeup event
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
