On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> It makes my IVB very ill, starts spewing RCU stall warnings, but is
> otherwise very unresponsive.
>
> Awesome... I'll prod at it when my brain works again.
>
Not sure if it's related, but I hit this on the core2 machine fuzzing
overnight with
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> It makes my IVB very ill, starts spewing RCU stall warnings, but is
> otherwise very unresponsive.
>
> Awesome... I'll prod at it when my brain works again.
>
Not sure if it's related, but I hit this on the core2 machine fuzzing
overnight with
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 03:40:44PM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> > Not sure if this info helps, but if I make perf_fuzzer *not* create AUX
> > mmap() buffers, I'm unable to reproduce the hangs both on core2 and
> > haswell.
>
> Confirmed, I can crash
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 03:40:44PM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> > Not sure if this info helps, but if I make perf_fuzzer *not* create AUX
> > mmap() buffers, I'm unable to reproduce the hangs both on core2 and
> > haswell.
>
> Confirmed, I can crash
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 01:21:12PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > Yuck. This time it was stack recursion on the entry stack. In the
> > > previous error, recursion was detected on the IRQ stack.
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 01:21:12PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > Yuck. This time it was stack recursion on the entry stack. In the
> > > previous error, recursion was detected on the IRQ stack.
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 03:15:16PM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> Not sure if this info helps, but if I make perf_fuzzer *not* create AUX
> mmap() buffers, I'm unable to reproduce the hangs both on core2 and
> haswell.
That certainly reduces the amount of code to stare at. Will do so
tomorrow.
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 03:15:16PM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> Not sure if this info helps, but if I make perf_fuzzer *not* create AUX
> mmap() buffers, I'm unable to reproduce the hangs both on core2 and
> haswell.
That certainly reduces the amount of code to stare at. Will do so
tomorrow.
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
> Not sure if this info helps, but if I make perf_fuzzer *not* create AUX
> mmap() buffers, I'm unable to reproduce the hangs both on core2 and
> haswell.
Confirmed, I can crash the system without the fuzzer, just by doing
perf record
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
> Not sure if this info helps, but if I make perf_fuzzer *not* create AUX
> mmap() buffers, I'm unable to reproduce the hangs both on core2 and
> haswell.
Confirmed, I can crash the system without the fuzzer, just by doing
perf record
Not sure if this info helps, but if I make perf_fuzzer *not* create AUX
mmap() buffers, I'm unable to reproduce the hangs both on core2 and
haswell.
Vince
Not sure if this info helps, but if I make perf_fuzzer *not* create AUX
mmap() buffers, I'm unable to reproduce the hangs both on core2 and
haswell.
Vince
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 01:21:12PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > Yuck. This time it was stack recursion on the entry stack. In the
> > previous error, recursion was detected on the IRQ stack. Otherwise they
> > look quite similar.
> >
> > Was
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 01:21:12PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > Yuck. This time it was stack recursion on the entry stack. In the
> > previous error, recursion was detected on the IRQ stack. Otherwise they
> > look quite similar.
> >
> > Was
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 01:21:12PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> Yuck. This time it was stack recursion on the entry stack. In the
> previous error, recursion was detected on the IRQ stack. Otherwise they
> look quite similar.
>
> Was that also with nopti?
Both with pti enabled, nopti makes
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 01:21:12PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> Yuck. This time it was stack recursion on the entry stack. In the
> previous error, recursion was detected on the IRQ stack. Otherwise they
> look quite similar.
>
> Was that also with nopti?
Both with pti enabled, nopti makes
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 02:00:27PM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>
> > For the crash, you might try enabling CONFIG_DEBUG_ENTRY and seeing if
> > that gives you any output.
>
> I did enable that, didn't seem to help on the haswell machien at least.
>
>
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 02:00:27PM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>
> > For the crash, you might try enabling CONFIG_DEBUG_ENTRY and seeing if
> > that gives you any output.
>
> I did enable that, didn't seem to help on the haswell machien at least.
>
>
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 06:03:47PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
> > [ 823.919729] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at
> > 88011a7a1000
> > [ 823.926928] IP: 0x7fbda0042b3c
> >
> > I'm dumping vmlinux and can't find address
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 06:03:47PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
> > [ 823.919729] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at
> > 88011a7a1000
> > [ 823.926928] IP: 0x7fbda0042b3c
> >
> > I'm dumping vmlinux and can't find address
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 01:20:10PM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> > on the same core2 machine I got this which didn't crash the machine (but
> > the perf_fuzzer process is stuck)
>
> also got this one:
>
> Cannot open /sys/kernel/tracing/kprobe_events
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 01:20:10PM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> > on the same core2 machine I got this which didn't crash the machine (but
> > the perf_fuzzer process is stuck)
>
> also got this one:
>
> Cannot open /sys/kernel/tracing/kprobe_events
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> For the crash, you might try enabling CONFIG_DEBUG_ENTRY and seeing if
> that gives you any output.
I did enable that, didn't seem to help on the haswell machien at least.
> > > > WARNING: can't dereference iret registers at 0783fea8 for ip
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> For the crash, you might try enabling CONFIG_DEBUG_ENTRY and seeing if
> that gives you any output.
I did enable that, didn't seem to help on the haswell machien at least.
> > > > WARNING: can't dereference iret registers at 0783fea8 for ip
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
> on the same core2 machine I got this which didn't crash the machine (but
> the perf_fuzzer process is stuck)
also got this one:
Cannot open /sys/kernel/tracing/kprobe_events
[ 408.159243] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 23s!
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
> on the same core2 machine I got this which didn't crash the machine (but
> the perf_fuzzer process is stuck)
also got this one:
Cannot open /sys/kernel/tracing/kprobe_events
[ 408.159243] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 23s!
on the same core2 machine I got this which didn't crash the machine (but
the perf_fuzzer process is stuck)
[ 4592.608066] INFO: task systemd-logind:488 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 4592.615159] Not tainted 4.15.0-rc7+ #211
[ 4592.619648] "echo 0 >
on the same core2 machine I got this which didn't crash the machine (but
the perf_fuzzer process is stuck)
[ 4592.608066] INFO: task systemd-logind:488 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
[ 4592.615159] Not tainted 4.15.0-rc7+ #211
[ 4592.619648] "echo 0 >
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 11:58:24AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > OK, I'm going to try fuzzing as a user with paranoid=0, and if that
> > > doesn't help, I'm going to switch to linus' tree with my
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 11:58:24AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > OK, I'm going to try fuzzing as a user with paranoid=0, and if that
> > > doesn't help, I'm going to switch to linus' tree with my
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > OK, I'm going to try fuzzing as a user with paranoid=0, and if that
> > doesn't help, I'm going to switch to linus' tree with my patches on.
>
> OK, I'm fuzzing on a core2 machine and it locks up too.
>
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > OK, I'm going to try fuzzing as a user with paranoid=0, and if that
> > doesn't help, I'm going to switch to linus' tree with my patches on.
>
> OK, I'm fuzzing on a core2 machine and it locks up too.
>
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> OK, I'm going to try fuzzing as a user with paranoid=0, and if that
> doesn't help, I'm going to switch to linus' tree with my patches on.
OK, I'm fuzzing on a core2 machine and it locks up too.
It did give the following first (but it kept going for
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> OK, I'm going to try fuzzing as a user with paranoid=0, and if that
> doesn't help, I'm going to switch to linus' tree with my patches on.
OK, I'm fuzzing on a core2 machine and it locks up too.
It did give the following first (but it kept going for
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:26:14AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > I'm seeing things like:
> >
> > Cannot open /sys/kernel/tracing/kprobe_events
> >
> > this is likely caused by me not having anything mounted there. Rostedt
> > provided the magic
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:26:14AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > I'm seeing things like:
> >
> > Cannot open /sys/kernel/tracing/kprobe_events
> >
> > this is likely caused by me not having anything mounted there. Rostedt
> > provided the magic
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:13:53AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:44:23AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > So remind me again, how are you running that fuzzer? I'm running
> > > ./fast_repro99.sh as root.
> >
> > I'm
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:13:53AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:44:23AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > So remind me again, how are you running that fuzzer? I'm running
> > > ./fast_repro99.sh as root.
> >
> > I'm
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I'm seeing things like:
>
> Cannot open /sys/kernel/tracing/kprobe_events
>
> this is likely caused by me not having anything mounted there. Rostedt
> provided the magic incantation to make that work, I'll go try now.
The perf_fuzzer krpobe code is
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I'm seeing things like:
>
> Cannot open /sys/kernel/tracing/kprobe_events
>
> this is likely caused by me not having anything mounted there. Rostedt
> provided the magic incantation to make that work, I'll go try now.
The perf_fuzzer krpobe code is
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:44:23AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > So remind me again, how are you running that fuzzer? I'm running
> > ./fast_repro99.sh as root.
>
> I'm running ./fast_repro98.sh on a regular haswell machine with paranoid
> set to
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:44:23AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > So remind me again, how are you running that fuzzer? I'm running
> > ./fast_repro99.sh as root.
>
> I'm running ./fast_repro98.sh on a regular haswell machine with paranoid
> set to
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 11:07:16AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 05:05:51PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:56:52AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> > > On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >
> > > > So CONFIG_PAGE_TABLE_ISOLATION=y and
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 11:07:16AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 05:05:51PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:56:52AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> > > On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >
> > > > So CONFIG_PAGE_TABLE_ISOLATION=y and
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
> Also I managed to hit (presumably) the same bug on a skylake machine.
> That one doesn't have a serial cable hooked up to it, I'll try to see if I
> can find one.
>
> I am running debian-unstable with gcc 7.2 if it makes a difference.
I built the
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Vince Weaver wrote:
> Also I managed to hit (presumably) the same bug on a skylake machine.
> That one doesn't have a serial cable hooked up to it, I'll try to see if I
> can find one.
>
> I am running debian-unstable with gcc 7.2 if it makes a difference.
I built the
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 01:09:57PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 19:02:07 +0100
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > This would globally serialize all perf_ioctl()'s, also that event_mutex
> > is for trace_events and really does not belong in perf.
> >
> > So
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 01:09:57PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 19:02:07 +0100
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > This would globally serialize all perf_ioctl()'s, also that event_mutex
> > is for trace_events and really does not belong in perf.
> >
> > So no, I really rather
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 19:02:07 +0100
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> This would globally serialize all perf_ioctl()'s, also that event_mutex
> is for trace_events and really does not belong in perf.
>
> So no, I really rather would not do this.
>
> The alternative I was thinking of
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 19:02:07 +0100
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> This would globally serialize all perf_ioctl()'s, also that event_mutex
> is for trace_events and really does not belong in perf.
>
> So no, I really rather would not do this.
>
> The alternative I was thinking of was lifting the cpuhp
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 12:53:46PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Looking at ftrace_profile_set_filter(), I see it starts with:
>
> mutex_lock(_mutex);
>
> How much of a big deal would it be if we move taking event_mutex() into
> perf_ioctl(), and then make ftrace_profile_set_filter() not
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 12:53:46PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Looking at ftrace_profile_set_filter(), I see it starts with:
>
> mutex_lock(_mutex);
>
> How much of a big deal would it be if we move taking event_mutex() into
> perf_ioctl(), and then make ftrace_profile_set_filter() not
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 17:14:00 +0100
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 04:12:53PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > In any case, I found yet another lockdep splat, trying to figure out wth
> > to do about that.
>
> An of course, testing this one yields yet
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 17:14:00 +0100
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 04:12:53PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > In any case, I found yet another lockdep splat, trying to figure out wth
> > to do about that.
>
> An of course, testing this one yields yet another lockdep splat..
I tried it again with your patch and force_early_printk, no luck.
I can start dropping printks around the NMI code but I feel like I don't
really know what I'm doing.
Also I managed to hit (presumably) the same bug on a skylake machine.
That one doesn't have a serial cable hooked up to it,
I tried it again with your patch and force_early_printk, no luck.
I can start dropping printks around the NMI code but I feel like I don't
really know what I'm doing.
Also I managed to hit (presumably) the same bug on a skylake machine.
That one doesn't have a serial cable hooked up to it,
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 05:05:51PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:56:52AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > So CONFIG_PAGE_TABLE_ISOLATION=y and booting with "pti=off" makes it
> > > 'work', right?
> >
> > yes.
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 05:05:51PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:56:52AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > So CONFIG_PAGE_TABLE_ISOLATION=y and booting with "pti=off" makes it
> > > 'work', right?
> >
> > yes.
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 05:16:06PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > + force_early_printk
> > + Forcefully uses early_console (as per earlyprintk=)
> > + usage for regular printk, bypassing everything,
> > + including the syslog (dmesg will be
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 05:16:06PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > + force_early_printk
> > + Forcefully uses early_console (as per earlyprintk=)
> > + usage for regular printk, bypassing everything,
> > + including the syslog (dmesg will be
* Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:24:55AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > > I'll try your patch and see if it makes a difference.
> > >
> > > I suspect not, it shouldn't be PTI specific.
> >
> > yes,
* Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:24:55AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > > I'll try your patch and see if it makes a difference.
> > >
> > > I suspect not, it shouldn't be PTI specific.
> >
> > yes, applying your patch
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 04:12:53PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> In any case, I found yet another lockdep splat, trying to figure out wth
> to do about that.
An of course, testing this one yields yet another lockdep splat..
onwards to #3 :/
---
Subject: perf: Fix another perf,trace,cpuhp lock
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 04:12:53PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> In any case, I found yet another lockdep splat, trying to figure out wth
> to do about that.
An of course, testing this one yields yet another lockdep splat..
onwards to #3 :/
---
Subject: perf: Fix another perf,trace,cpuhp lock
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:56:52AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > So CONFIG_PAGE_TABLE_ISOLATION=y and booting with "pti=off" makes it
> > 'work', right?
>
> yes. Previously I was changing CONFIG_PAGE_TABLE_ISOLATION and
> recompiling, but just now
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:56:52AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > So CONFIG_PAGE_TABLE_ISOLATION=y and booting with "pti=off" makes it
> > 'work', right?
>
> yes. Previously I was changing CONFIG_PAGE_TABLE_ISOLATION and
> recompiling, but just now
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> So CONFIG_PAGE_TABLE_ISOLATION=y and booting with "pti=off" makes it
> 'work', right?
yes. Previously I was changing CONFIG_PAGE_TABLE_ISOLATION and
recompiling, but just now I booted with it set to yes and pti=off and the
fuzzer has been running
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> So CONFIG_PAGE_TABLE_ISOLATION=y and booting with "pti=off" makes it
> 'work', right?
yes. Previously I was changing CONFIG_PAGE_TABLE_ISOLATION and
recompiling, but just now I booted with it set to yes and pti=off and the
fuzzer has been running
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:24:55AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > > I'll try your patch and see if it makes a difference.
> >
> > I suspect not, it shouldn't be PTI specific.
>
> yes, applying your patch didn't help, still locks up on the Haswell
>
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:24:55AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > > I'll try your patch and see if it makes a difference.
> >
> > I suspect not, it shouldn't be PTI specific.
>
> yes, applying your patch didn't help, still locks up on the Haswell
>
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > I'll try your patch and see if it makes a difference.
>
> I suspect not, it shouldn't be PTI specific.
yes, applying your patch didn't help, still locks up on the Haswell
machine.
Is there any debugging I could turn on that would help? I tried
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > I'll try your patch and see if it makes a difference.
>
> I suspect not, it shouldn't be PTI specific.
yes, applying your patch didn't help, still locks up on the Haswell
machine.
Is there any debugging I could turn on that would help? I tried
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:44:23AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > So remind me again, how are you running that fuzzer? I'm running
> > ./fast_repro99.sh as root.
>
> I'm running ./fast_repro98.sh on a regular haswell machine with paranoid
> set to
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:44:23AM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > So remind me again, how are you running that fuzzer? I'm running
> > ./fast_repro99.sh as root.
>
> I'm running ./fast_repro98.sh on a regular haswell machine with paranoid
> set to
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> So remind me again, how are you running that fuzzer? I'm running
> ./fast_repro99.sh as root.
I'm running ./fast_repro98.sh on a regular haswell machine with paranoid
set to "0".
I'll try your patch and see if it makes a difference.
I can also try
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> So remind me again, how are you running that fuzzer? I'm running
> ./fast_repro99.sh as root.
I'm running ./fast_repro98.sh on a regular haswell machine with paranoid
set to "0".
I'll try your patch and see if it makes a difference.
I can also try
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 02:26:02PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> OK, so I'm running on an IVB-EP with PTI enabled. I insta triggered a
> lockdep splat
---
Subject: perf: Fix lock inversion between perf,trace,cpuhp
From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Tue Jan 9 13:10:30 CET 2018
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 02:26:02PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> OK, so I'm running on an IVB-EP with PTI enabled. I insta triggered a
> lockdep splat
---
Subject: perf: Fix lock inversion between perf,trace,cpuhp
From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Tue Jan 9 13:10:30 CET 2018
Lockdep gifted us:
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 11:25:07AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 03:29:42PM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> > On Mon, 8 Jan 2018, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > Note that the page table isolation (PTI) feature has a number of effects
> > > on perf
> > > and on NMI
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 11:25:07AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 03:29:42PM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> > On Mon, 8 Jan 2018, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > Note that the page table isolation (PTI) feature has a number of effects
> > > on perf
> > > and on NMI
On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 03:29:42PM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Jan 2018, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > Note that the page table isolation (PTI) feature has a number of effects on
> > perf
> > and on NMI handlers, so one of the things to try would be to disable PTI.
>
> Yes, it seems to
On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 03:29:42PM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Jan 2018, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > Note that the page table isolation (PTI) feature has a number of effects on
> > perf
> > and on NMI handlers, so one of the things to try would be to disable PTI.
>
> Yes, it seems to
On Mon, 8 Jan 2018, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> Note that the page table isolation (PTI) feature has a number of effects on
> perf
> and on NMI handlers, so one of the things to try would be to disable PTI.
Yes, it seems to be a KPTI issue.
With KPTI disabled I can fuzz for a few hours, no
On Mon, 8 Jan 2018, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> Note that the page table isolation (PTI) feature has a number of effects on
> perf
> and on NMI handlers, so one of the things to try would be to disable PTI.
Yes, it seems to be a KPTI issue.
With KPTI disabled I can fuzz for a few hours, no
* Vince Weaver wrote:
> Hello
>
> Was trying out current git (4.15-rc7) and the perf_fuzzer very quickly
> will lock up my Haswell test machine so solidly that I don't get any debug
> info, even with a serial console.
That's pretty concerning ...
> I'll try
* Vince Weaver wrote:
> Hello
>
> Was trying out current git (4.15-rc7) and the perf_fuzzer very quickly
> will lock up my Haswell test machine so solidly that I don't get any debug
> info, even with a serial console.
That's pretty concerning ...
> I'll try enabling various debug options
Hello
Was trying out current git (4.15-rc7) and the perf_fuzzer very quickly
will lock up my Haswell test machine so solidly that I don't get any debug
info, even with a serial console.
I'll try enabling various debug options to see if I can get a more useful
bug report.
Vince
Hello
Was trying out current git (4.15-rc7) and the perf_fuzzer very quickly
will lock up my Haswell test machine so solidly that I don't get any debug
info, even with a serial console.
I'll try enabling various debug options to see if I can get a more useful
bug report.
Vince
88 matches
Mail list logo