Re: [PATCH] rtnetlink: add rtnl_lock debug log
From: Andy Shevchenko <hidden>
Date: 2021-04-29 09:32:37
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, linux-mediatek, lkml
On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 10:21 AM Rocco Yue [off-list ref] wrote:
We often encounter system hangs caused by certain processes holding rtnl_lock for a long time. Even if there is a lock detection mechanism in Linux, it is a bit troublesome and affects the system performance. We hope to add a lightweight debugging mechanism for detecting rtnl_lock. Up to now, we have discovered and solved some potential bugs through such debug information of this lightweight rtnl_lock, which is helpful for us. When you say Y for RTNL_LOCK_DEBUG, then the kernel will detect if any function hold rtnl_lock too long and some key information will be printed to help identify the issue point. i.e: from the following logs, we can clear know that the pid=5546
clearly
RfxSender_4 process hold rtnl_lock for a long time, causing the
holds
system hang. And we can also speculate that the delay operation
to hang
may be performed in devinet_ioctl(), resulting in rtnl_lock was not released in time. <6>[ 141.151364] ----------- rtnl_print_btrace start -----------
Can you, please, shrink this to the point?
<6>[ 141.152079] RfxSender_4[5546][R] hold rtnl_lock more than 2 sec, start time: 139129481562 <4>[ 141.153114] rtnl_lock+0x88/0xfc <4>[ 141.153523] devinet_ioctl+0x190/0x1268 <4>[ 141.154007] inet_ioctl+0x108/0x1f4 <4>[ 141.154449] sock_do_ioctl+0x88/0x200 <4>[ 141.154911] sock_ioctl+0x4b0/0x884 <4>[ 141.155367] do_vfs_ioctl+0x6b0/0xcc4 <4>[ 141.155830] __arm64_sys_ioctl+0xc0/0xec <4>[ 141.156326] el0_svc_common+0x130/0x2c0 <4>[ 141.156810] el0_svc_handler+0xd0/0xe0 <4>[ 141.157283] el0_svc+0x8/0xc <4>[ 141.157646] Call trace: <4>[ 141.157956] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x240 <4>[ 141.158418] show_stack+0x18/0x24 <4>[ 141.158836] rtnl_print_btrace+0x138/0x1cc <4>[ 141.159362] call_timer_fn+0x120/0x47c <4>[ 141.159834] expire_timers+0x28c/0x420 <4>[ 141.160306] __run_timers+0x3d0/0x494 <4>[ 141.160768] run_timer_softirq+0x24/0x48 <4>[ 141.161262] __do_softirq+0x26c/0x968 <4>[ 141.161725] irq_exit+0x1f8/0x2b4 <4>[ 141.162145] __handle_domain_irq+0xdc/0x15c <4>[ 141.162672] gic_handle_irq+0xe4/0x188 <4>[ 141.163144] el1_irq+0x104/0x200 <4>[ 141.163559] __const_udelay+0x118/0x1b0 <4>[ 141.164044] devinet_ioctl+0x1a0/0x1268 <4>[ 141.164527] inet_ioctl+0x108/0x1f4 <4>[ 141.164968] sock_do_ioctl+0x88/0x200 <4>[ 141.165428] sock_ioctl+0x4b0/0x884 <4>[ 141.165868] do_vfs_ioctl+0x6b0/0xcc4 <4>[ 141.166330] __arm64_sys_ioctl+0xc0/0xec <4>[ 141.166825] el0_svc_common+0x130/0x2c0 <4>[ 141.167308] el0_svc_handler+0xd0/0xe0 <4>[ 141.167786] el0_svc+0x8/0xc <6>[ 141.168153] ------------ rtnl_print_btrace end ----------- <6>[ 147.321389] rtnl_lock is held by [5546] from [139129481562] to [147321378812]
...
+static struct rtnl_debug_btrace_t rtnl_instance = {
+ .task = NULL,
+ .pid = 0,
+ .start_time = 0,
+ .end_time = 0,
+ .nr_entries = 0,static assumes all 0:s, what's the point?
+};
...
+static void rtnl_print_btrace(struct timer_list *unused)
+{
+ pr_info("----------- %s start -----------\n", __func__);
+ pr_info("%s[%d][%c] hold rtnl_lock more than 2 sec, start time: %llu\n",
+ rtnl_instance.task->comm,
+ rtnl_instance.pid,
+ task_state_to_char(rtnl_instance.task),
+ rtnl_instance.start_time);
+ stack_trace_print(rtnl_instance.addrs, rtnl_instance.nr_entries, 0);+ show_stack(rtnl_instance.task, NULL, KERN_DEBUG);
Unaligned debug level.
+ pr_info("------------ %s end -----------\n", __func__);Looking into tons of these, perhaps you need to define pr_fmt(). I haven't checked if it's already defined, though.
+}
...
+ if (rtnl_instance.end_time - rtnl_instance.start_time > 2000000000ULL) {Perhaps you should use one of the defined constants from time64.h ?
+ pr_info("rtnl_lock is held by [%d] from [%llu] to [%llu]\n",
+ rtnl_instance.pid,
+ rtnl_instance.start_time,
+ rtnl_instance.end_time);
+ }-- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko