Oops when completing request on the wrong queue
Jens Axboe
axboe at kernel.dk
Tue Aug 23 14:11:54 PDT 2016
On 08/23/2016 02:54 PM, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
> Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman at linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
>
>>> Can you share what you ran to online/offline CPUs? I can't reproduce
>>> this here.
>>
>> I was using the ppc64_cpu tool, which shouldn't do nothing more than
>> write to sysfs. but I just reproduced it with the script below.
>>
>> Note that this is ppc64le. I don't have a x86 in hand to attempt to
>> reproduce right now, but I'll look for one and see how it goes.
>
> Hi,
>
> Any luck on reproducing it? We were initially reproducing with a
> proprietary stress test, but I gave a try to a generated fio jobfile
> associated with the SMT script I shared earlier and I could reproduce
> the crash consistently in less than 10 minutes of execution. this was
> still ppc64le, though. I couldn't get my hands on nvme on x86 yet.
Nope, I have not been able to reproduce it. How long does the CPU
offline/online actions take on ppc64? It's pretty slow on x86, which may
hide the issue. I took out the various printk's associated with bringing
a CPU off/online, as well as IRQ breaking parts, but didn't help in
reproducing it.
> The job file I used, as well as the smt.sh script, in case you want to
> give it a try:
>
> jobfile: http://krisman.be/k/nvmejob.fio
> smt.sh: http://krisman.be/k/smt.sh
>
> Still, the trigger seems to be consistently a heavy load of IO
> associated with CPU addition/removal.
My workload looks similar to yours, in that it's high depth and with a
lot of jobs to keep most CPUs loaded. My bash script is different than
yours, I'll try that and see if it helps here.
--
Jens Axboe
More information about the Linux-nvme
mailing list