[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] PV-shim 4.13 assertion failures during vcpu_wake()
On 21.10.19 13:36, Roger Pau Monné wrote: On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 12:52:10PM +0200, Jürgen Groß wrote:On 21.10.19 11:51, Sergey Dyasli wrote:Hello, While testing pv-shim from a snapshot of staging 4.13 branch (with core- scheduling patches applied), some sort of scheduling issues were uncovered which usually leads to a guest lockup (sometimes with soft lockup messages from Linux kernel). This happens more frequently on SandyBridge CPUs. After enabling CONFIG_DEBUG in pv-shim, the following assertions failed: Null scheduler: Assertion 'lock == get_sched_res(i->res->master_cpu)->schedule_lock' failed at ...are/xen-dir/xen-root/xen/include/xen/sched-if.h:278 (full crash log: https://paste.debian.net/1108861/ ) Credit1 scheduler: Assertion 'cpumask_cycle(cpu, unit->cpu_hard_affinity) == cpu' failed at sched_credit.c:383 (full crash log: https://paste.debian.net/1108862/ ) I'm currently investigation those, but would appreciate any help or suggestions.Hmm, I think that pv_shim_cpu_up() shouldn't do the vcpu_wake(), but the caller. Does the attached patch help? JuergenFrom 068ea0419d1a67e967b9431ed11e24b731cd357f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 12:28:33 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] xen/shim: fix pv-shim cpu up/down Calling vcpu_wake() from pv_shim_cpu_up() is wrong as it is not yet sure that the correct scheduler has taken over the cpu.I'm not sure why this is wrong, the scheduler should be capable of handling 2 vCPUs on a single pCPU while the new pCPU is brought online? Oh, right, I made some false assumptions. This patch is pure nonsense. Juergen _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |