Keith Owens wrote:
>
> Just because the traces end up in stext_lock does not mean that they
> are the same bug. Locks are optimized for pipeline performance, the
> code for "got the lock" is in the main text section, the code for
> "cannot get lock, need to wait" is moved to a separate text section.
> That way only the failure case gets pipeline stalls.
>
> The downside of this optimization is that all code that is waiting for
> a lock appears to be in the out of line section and the only label in
> that section is right at the start. So all lock code appears to be in
> stext_lock. What really matters is where the stext_lock code jumps
> back to, that tells you which code is waiting for the lock. In this
> case you have jumps back to blk_get_queue+9/60 so it is waiting on
> io_request_lock. Now all you have to do is work out who is holding
> onto io_request_lock.
What do you think of this addition to the x86 debug code, Keith:
If you get an NMI oops it says:
NMI Watchdog detected LOCKUP on CPU1, registers:
CPU: 1
EIP: 0010:[<c01fe212>]
EFLAGS: 00000086
Waiting on spinlock! Spinner's EIP is [<c0130d7a>]
...
And if you get a spindeadlock with interrupts enabled
and hit ALT-SYSRQ-P it says:
CPU:1 << This is new, as well.
EIP: 0010:[<c01fe1b7>] EFLAGS: 00000286
Waiting on spinlock! Spinner's EIP is [<c0130d7a>]
EAX: 0000000f EBX: cded5fbc ECX: 00000002 EDX: 000008fc
ESI: 00000000 EDI: 00000000 EBP: bffff5e4 DS: 0018 ES: 0018
CR0: 8005003b CR2: 4000a820 CR3: 0e0fc000 CR4: 00000090
Doing this for rwlocks is, umm, trickier.
Will ksymoops automatically parse the EIP?
--- linux-2.4.0-test9-pre4/arch/i386/vmlinux.lds Tue Jul 11 22:21:12 2000
+++ linux-akpm/arch/i386/vmlinux.lds Wed Sep 20 20:58:25 2000
@@ -13,7 +13,9 @@
*(.fixup)
*(.gnu.warning)
} = 0x9090
+ __start___text_lock = .;
.text.lock : { *(.text.lock) } /* out-of-line lock text */
+ __stop___text_lock = .;
.rodata : { *(.rodata) }
.kstrtab : { *(.kstrtab) }
--- linux-2.4.0-test9-pre4/arch/i386/kernel/traps.c Tue Sep 19 19:42:08 2000
+++ linux-akpm/arch/i386/kernel/traps.c Wed Sep 20 23:49:22 2000
@@ -152,6 +152,40 @@
}
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+void show_spinlock_owner(struct pt_regs *regs)
+{
+ extern int __start___text_lock, __stop___text_lock;
+ u8 *start_lock = (u8 *)&__start___text_lock;
+ u8 *stop_lock = (u8 *)&__stop___text_lock;
+ u8 *eip = (u8 *)regs->eip;
+ u8 *last_eip = eip + 16; /* size of spin_lock_string */
+
+ if (last_eip > stop_lock)
+ last_eip = stop_lock;
+
+ last_eip -= 5; /* size of `jmp xxx' */
+
+ /*
+ * Search for the start of the jmp back. There may be
+ * more than one 0xe9 opcode in there, but we only dump
+ * the first one (which may be wrong).
+ */
+ while (eip >= start_lock && eip < last_eip) {
+ if (*eip == 0xe9) { /* relative jmp */
+ u8 *back = *(u8 **)(eip + 1);
+ back += (u32)(eip + 5);
+ printk("Waiting on spinlock! Spinner's EIP is [<%p>]\n", back);
+ break;
+ }
+ eip++;
+ }
+}
+#else
+void show_spinlock_owner(struct pt_regs *regs)
+{}
+#endif
+
static void show_registers(struct pt_regs *regs)
{
int i;
@@ -168,6 +202,7 @@
}
printk("CPU: %d\nEIP: %04x:[<%08lx>]\nEFLAGS: %08lx\n",
smp_processor_id(), 0xffff & regs->xcs, regs->eip, regs->eflags);
+ show_spinlock_owner(regs);
printk("eax: %08lx ebx: %08lx ecx: %08lx edx: %08lx\n",
regs->eax, regs->ebx, regs->ecx, regs->edx);
printk("esi: %08lx edi: %08lx ebp: %08lx esp: %08lx\n",
@@ -396,7 +431,7 @@
__setup("nmi_watchdog=", setup_nmi_watchdog);
-extern spinlock_t console_lock;
+extern spinlock_t console_lock, timerlist_lock;
static spinlock_t nmi_print_lock = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED;
inline void nmi_watchdog_tick(struct pt_regs * regs)
@@ -411,7 +446,8 @@
*
* since NMIs dont listen to _any_ locks, we have to be extremely
* careful not to rely on unsafe variables. The printk might lock
- * up though, so we have to break up console_lock first ...
+ * up though, so we have to break up console_lock and timerlist_lock
+ * first ...
* [when there will be more tty-related locks, break them up
* here too!]
*/
@@ -441,6 +477,8 @@
*/
spin_trylock(&console_lock);
spin_unlock(&console_lock);
+ spin_trylock(&timerlist_lock);
+ spin_unlock(&timerlist_lock);
printk("NMI Watchdog detected LOCKUP on CPU%d, registers:\n", cpu);
show_registers(regs);
printk("console shuts up ...\n");
--- linux-2.4.0-test9-pre4/arch/i386/kernel/process.c Sat Sep 9 16:19:22 2000
+++ linux-akpm/arch/i386/kernel/process.c Wed Sep 20 23:54:31 2000
@@ -380,15 +380,18 @@
}
+extern void show_spinlock_owner(struct pt_regs *regs);
+
void show_regs(struct pt_regs * regs)
{
unsigned long cr0 = 0L, cr2 = 0L, cr3 = 0L, cr4 = 0L;
printk("\n");
- printk("EIP: %04x:[<%08lx>]",0xffff & regs->xcs,regs->eip);
+ printk("CPU: %d\nEIP: %04x:[<%08lx>]", smp_processor_id(), 0xffff & regs->xcs,regs->eip);
if (regs->xcs & 3)
printk(" ESP: %04x:%08lx",0xffff & regs->xss,regs->esp);
printk(" EFLAGS: %08lx\n",regs->eflags);
+ show_spinlock_owner(regs);
printk("EAX: %08lx EBX: %08lx ECX: %08lx EDX: %08lx\n",
regs->eax,regs->ebx,regs->ecx,regs->edx);
printk("ESI: %08lx EDI: %08lx EBP: %08lx",
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 23 2000 - 21:00:23 EST