On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 05:11:53PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 04/06/2018 04:58 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 04:26:49PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 04/06/2018 03:41 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 12:19:19PM +0200, Ch
On 04/06/2018 04:58 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 04:26:49PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 04/06/2018 03:41 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 12:19:19PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
On 04/06/2018 11:23 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
>
On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 04:26:49PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 04/06/2018 03:41 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 12:19:19PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 04/06/2018 11:23 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 10:51:28AM +0200, Ch
On 04/06/2018 03:41 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 12:19:19PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 04/06/2018 11:23 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 10:51:28AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
On 04/06/2018 10:41 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
>
On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 12:19:19PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 04/06/2018 11:23 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 10:51:28AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 04/06/2018 10:41 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 07:39:56PM +0200, Ch
On 04/06/2018 11:23 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 10:51:28AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 04/06/2018 10:41 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 07:39:56PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
On 04/05/2018 06:11 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
>
On 04/06/2018 11:23 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 10:51:28AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 04/06/2018 10:41 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 07:39:56PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
On 04/05/2018 06:11 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
>
On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 10:51:28AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 04/06/2018 10:41 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 07:39:56PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 04/05/2018 06:11 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
>
> Could you please apply the following
On 04/06/2018 10:51 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 04/06/2018 10:41 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 07:39:56PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 04/05/2018 06:11 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
>
> Could you please apply the following patch and provide the
On 04/06/2018 10:41 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 07:39:56PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 04/05/2018 06:11 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
Could you please apply the following patch and provide the dmesg boot log?
>>>
>>> And please post out the 'lscpu' log togeth
On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 07:39:56PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 04/05/2018 06:11 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> >>
> >> Could you please apply the following patch and provide the dmesg boot log?
> >
> > And please post out the 'lscpu' log together from the test machine too.
>
> attached.
On 04/05/2018 06:05 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
[...]
> diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
> index 90838e998f66..996f8a963026 100644
> --- a/block/blk-mq.c
> +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
> @@ -1324,9 +1324,18 @@ static void __blk_mq_run_hw_queue(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx
> *hctx)
>*/
> if (!c
On 04/05/2018 07:39 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 04/05/2018 06:11 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
>>>
>>> Could you please apply the following patch and provide the dmesg boot log?
>>
>> And please post out the 'lscpu' log together from the test machine too.
>
> attached.
>
> As I said befor
On 04/05/2018 06:11 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
>>
>> Could you please apply the following patch and provide the dmesg boot log?
>
> And please post out the 'lscpu' log together from the test machine too.
attached.
As I said before this seems to go way with CONFIG_NR_CPUS=64 or smaller.
We have 282 nr
On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 12:05:03AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 04, 2018 at 10:18:13AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 03/30/2018 04:53 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 01:49:29PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 03/29/2018 01
On Wed, Apr 04, 2018 at 10:18:13AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 03/30/2018 04:53 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 01:49:29PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 03/29/2018 01:43 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 12:49:55PM +0200, Ch
On 03/30/2018 04:53 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 01:49:29PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 03/29/2018 01:43 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 12:49:55PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
On 03/29/2018 12:48 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
>
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 01:49:29PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 03/29/2018 01:43 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 12:49:55PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 03/29/2018 12:48 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 12:10:11PM +0200, Ch
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 12:49:55PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 03/29/2018 12:48 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 12:10:11PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 03/29/2018 11:40 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 11:09:08AM +0200, Ch
On 03/29/2018 12:48 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 12:10:11PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 03/29/2018 11:40 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 11:09:08AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
On 03/29/2018 09:23 AM, Christian Borntraeger
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 12:10:11PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 03/29/2018 11:40 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 11:09:08AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 03/29/2018 09:23 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 03/29/2018 04:00
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 05:52:16PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 09:23:10AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 03/29/2018 04:00 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 05:36:53PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 03/28/2018 05
On 03/29/2018 12:11 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 03/29/2018 11:52 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
>> From the debugfs log, hctx0 is mapped to lots of CPU, so it shouldn't be
>> unmapped, could you check if it is hctx0 which is unmapped when the
>> warning is triggered? If not, what is the unma
On 03/29/2018 11:52 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> From the debugfs log, hctx0 is mapped to lots of CPU, so it shouldn't be
> unmapped, could you check if it is hctx0 which is unmapped when the
> warning is triggered? If not, what is the unmapped hctx? And you can do
> that by adding one extra line:
>
>
On 03/29/2018 11:40 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 11:09:08AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 03/29/2018 09:23 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/29/2018 04:00 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 05:36:53PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger w
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 09:23:10AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 03/29/2018 04:00 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 05:36:53PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 03/28/2018 05:26 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> >>> Hi Christian,
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Mar 28, 20
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 11:09:08AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 03/29/2018 09:23 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 03/29/2018 04:00 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> >> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 05:36:53PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 03/28/2018 05:26
On 03/29/2018 09:23 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 03/29/2018 04:00 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 05:36:53PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/28/2018 05:26 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
Hi Christian,
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 09:45:10AM +0200,
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 05:36:53PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 03/28/2018 05:26 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > Hi Christian,
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 09:45:10AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >> FWIW, this patch does not fix the issue for me:
> >>
> >> ostname=? addr=? te
FWIW, these logs were from a different system (with less disks and cpus).
the related log is
[4.114191] dasd-eckd.2aa01a: 0.0.3f77: New DASD 3390/0C (CU 3990/01) with
30051 cylinders, 15 heads, 224 sectors
[4.114852] dasd-eckd.2aa01a: 0.0.3f74: New DASD 3390/0C (CU 3990/01) with
30051 cy
With that patch I now get:
[ 40.620619] virbr0: port 1(virbr0-nic) entered disabled state
[ 47.418592] run queue from wrong CPU 3, hctx inactive
[ 47.418602] CPU: 3 PID: 2153 Comm: kworker/3:1H Tainted: GW
4.16.0-rc7+ #27
[ 47.418604] Hardware name: IBM 2964 NC9 704 (LPAR)
On 03/28/2018 05:26 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> Hi Christian,
>
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 09:45:10AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>> FWIW, this patch does not fix the issue for me:
>>
>> ostname=? addr=? terminal=? res=success'
>> [ 21.454961] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 1882 at block/blk-mq.c:1410
Hi Christian,
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 09:45:10AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> FWIW, this patch does not fix the issue for me:
>
> ostname=? addr=? terminal=? res=success'
> [ 21.454961] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 1882 at block/blk-mq.c:1410
> __blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue+0xbe/0xd8
> [ 21.4
On 3/28/18 8:38 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 3/28/18 1:45 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>> FWIW, this patch does not fix the issue for me:
>
> Looks like I didn't do the delayed path. How about the below?
OK, final version... This is more in line with what I originally
suggested.
diff --git a/b
On 3/28/18 1:45 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> FWIW, this patch does not fix the issue for me:
Looks like I didn't do the delayed path. How about the below?
diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
index 16e83e6df404..fd663ae1094c 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq.c
@@ -1302
FWIW, this patch does not fix the issue for me:
ostname=? addr=? terminal=? res=success'
[ 21.454961] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 1882 at block/blk-mq.c:1410
__blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue+0xbe/0xd8
[ 21.454968] Modules linked in: scsi_dh_rdac scsi_dh_emc scsi_dh_alua
dm_mirror dm_region_hash dm_log d
On 3/27/18 7:20 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> From commit 20e4d813931961fe ("blk-mq: simplify queue mapping & schedule
> with each possisble CPU") on, it should be easier to see unmapped hctx
> in some CPU topo, such as, hctx may not be mapped to any CPU.
>
> This patch avoids the warning in __blk_mq_dela
>From commit 20e4d813931961fe ("blk-mq: simplify queue mapping & schedule
with each possisble CPU") on, it should be easier to see unmapped hctx
in some CPU topo, such as, hctx may not be mapped to any CPU.
This patch avoids the warning in __blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue() by
checking if the hctx is m
38 matches
Mail list logo