usb: dwc2: NMI watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 146s
Eric Anholt
eric at anholt.net
Thu Apr 20 15:57:35 EDT 2017
Doug Anderson <dianders at chromium.org> writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Eric Anholt <eric at anholt.net> wrote:
>> Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren at i2se.com> writes:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>> Doug Anderson <dianders at chromium.org> hat am 18. April 2017 um 22:41 geschrieben:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's hard to know for sure that all of this time is really in
>>>> urb_enqueue(). Possible we could have task switched out and been
>>>> blocked elsewhere. Using ftrace to get more fine-grained timings
>>>> would be useful. ktime_get(), ktime_sub(), and ktime_to_us() are your
>>>> friends here if you want to use trace_printk.
>>>
>>> i'm a newbie to ftrace, so i hope this would be helpful.
>>>
>>> # connect PL2303 to the onboard hub
>>> # echo 0 > options/sleep-time
>>> # echo 0 > function_profile_enabled
>>> # echo 1 > function_profile_enabled
>>> # ./usb_test
>>> # Waiting for at least 20 seconds and then disconnect PL2303
>>> # echo 0 > function_profile_enabled
>>> # cat trace_stat/function0
>>>
>>> Function Hit Time Avg s^2
>>> -------- --- ---- --- ---
>>> bcm2835_handle_irq 361347 219567633 us 607.636 us 1485199 us
>>> __handle_domain_irq 1082482 212639551 us 196.437 us 3642030 us
>>> generic_handle_irq 1082482 100592051 us 92.927 us 50511334 us
>>> irq_exit 1082482 98197771 us 90.715 us 29649040 us
>>> handle_level_irq 1082482 95812379 us 88.511 us 51910093 us
>>
>> If I'm reading this output right, we're spending half of our interrupt
>> processing time in irq_exit(), so even if dwc2's interrupt was free (the
>> generic_handle_irq() chain), we'd be eating about half the CPU getting
>> back out of the interrupt handler, right?
>>
>> I don't really know anything about DWC2 or USB, but is there any way we
>> could mitigate the interrupt frequency with this hardware? If nothing
>> else, could we loop reading gintsts until it reads back 0?
>
> Take ftrace with a little bit of a grain of salt, especially on older
> / slower ARMs (without the arch timer). Whenever ftrace takes a log
> it grabs a timestamp. This can be an expensive (ish) operation. Even
> on newer CPUs it's still not free if you call it as much as ftrace,
> but on older CPUs it's extra expensive.
If per-function timestamp cost was the problem, shouldn't I expect to
see a bunch of irq_exit()'s children each taking a bit of time? We have
a long callchain with the functions each taking a bit of time in the
dwc2 interrupt handler, but irq_exit() seems to be a monolithic cost.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20170420/7d2ce091/attachment.sig>
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list