Bug 441454 - cpufreq stress test cause ondemand governor deadlock
Summary: cpufreq stress test cause ondemand governor deadlock
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 449004
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5
Classification: Red Hat
Component: kernel
Version: 5.2
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
low
low
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: John Villalovos
QA Contact: Red Hat Kernel QE team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2008-04-08 07:49 UTC by Song, Youquan
Modified: 2015-05-08 13:57 UTC (History)
8 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2009-08-13 19:42:27 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
cpufreq_stress test case and and sysrq+t log and ps -aux log. (48.35 KB, application/octet-stream)
2008-04-08 07:49 UTC, Song, Youquan
no flags Details

Description Song, Youquan 2008-04-08 07:49:31 UTC
Description of problem:

cpufreq stress test will cause ondemand governor deadlock on Harwich-
Truland,4x Xeon 7130 3.2GHz;E8501;DP 2x1M L2 8M L3 800MHz, RHEL5.2 snapshot1.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1. get the cpufreq_stress test case in the attachment 
2 [details]. cd cpufreq_stress/initial; make
3. ./cpufreq_stress

  
Actual results:
After 7~8 hours, ps -aux find that kondemand daemon deadlock. 
cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_governor will hung.

Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 1 Song, Youquan 2008-04-08 07:49:31 UTC
Created attachment 301612 [details]
cpufreq_stress test case and and sysrq+t log and ps -aux log.

Comment 2 Jarod Wilson 2008-04-08 15:10:23 UTC
This is actually a kernel problem, not a cpuspeed package problem, reassigning
to the correct component.

Comment 3 Peter Martuccelli 2008-07-25 16:20:54 UTC
John please work with Matthew and determine if this is still a problem after the
RHEL 5.3 updates to power management are in the kernel.  Please work on
reproducing the problem in the Westford lab.

Comment 4 Matthew Garrett 2008-07-25 17:14:09 UTC
At a guess, it's CPU hotplug related - the locking for that was broken for a
long time. I'll look into the current code and see if there's an obvious fix.

Comment 5 John Villalovos 2008-07-28 13:59:53 UTC
Is this related to Bug 449004

Comment 6 Prarit Bhargava 2008-07-28 14:08:03 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)
> Is this related to Bug 449004

I don't think so.  AFAICT, someone did a alt-sysrq-t (and that caused the soft
lockup warnings at the end of the sysrq dump).  It looks significantly different
from the 449004 (where we see a series of softlockup messages).

P.

Comment 7 John Villalovos 2008-07-28 14:16:01 UTC
Youquan,

Let us know if they are related.  I wasn't sure if you created this Bugzilla,
then created the Issue Tracker, which then spawned Bug 449004

John

Comment 8 Song, Youquan 2008-07-29 01:59:06 UTC
Yes. this bug is relate to Bug 449004. Bug 449004 has the modified test case 
with which we can easier to reproduce the bug. so this bug is duplicate with 
Bug 449004. 

Comment 9 John Villalovos 2009-08-13 19:42:27 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 449004 ***


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.