Re: Interrupt storm
From: John Baldwin (jhb_at_FreeBSD.org)
Date: 06/29/05
- Previous message: John Baldwin: "Re: Timekeeping hosed by factor 3, high lapic[01] interrupt rates"
- Next in thread: Dan Cojocar: "Re: Interrupt storm"
- Reply: Dan Cojocar: "Re: Interrupt storm"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: Dan Cojocar <dan.cojocar@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 14:37:49 -0400
On Tuesday 05 April 2005 03:46 pm, Dan Cojocar wrote:
> On Apr 5, 2005 9:23 PM, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 05 April 2005 12:44 pm, Dan Cojocar wrote:
> > > On Apr 5, 2005 5:30 PM, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday 29 March 2005 01:35 pm, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday 29 March 2005 01:22 pm, Dan Cojocar wrote:
> > > > > > Hello all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I noticed the following interrupt storm in my dmesg:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Interrupt storm detected on "irq11: rl1"; throttling interrupt
> > > > > > source Interrupt storm detected on "irq5: rl0"; throttling
> > > > > > interrupt source
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here is my vmstat -i:
> > > > > > interrupt total rate
> > > > > > irq0: clk 128600 199
> > > > > > irq1: atkbd0 2499 3
> > > > > > irq4: sio0 2 0
> > > > > > irq5: rl0 128901 200
> > > > > > irq8: rtc 82294 127
> > > > > > irq11: rl1 128902 200
> > > > > > irq12: psm0 16152 25
> > > > > > irq14: ata0 12600 19
> > > > > > irq15: ata1 71 0
> > > > > > Total 500021 776
> > > > > >
> > > > > > and here is my dmesg:
> > > > > > http://cs.ubbcluj.ro/~dan/dmesg.txt
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have options DEVICE_POLLING and options HZ=200, i have tested
> > > > > > with greater HZ values like 1000, and without DEVICE_POLLING but
> > > > > > i have the same storm.
> > > > >
> > > > > Try this:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200503161154.04555.jkim
> > > >
> > > > He's not using an APIC so that won't make any difference.
> > >
> > > If I use APIC, I will get "watchdog timeout" as i posted in an old
> >
> > email:
> > > >rl0: watchdog timeout
> > > >rl1: watchdog timeout
> > > >rl0: watchdog timeout
> > > >rl1: watchdog timeout
> > > >rl1: watchdog timeout
> > > >rl1: watchdog timeout
> > > >rl1: watchdog timeout
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Dan
> >
> > That's indicative of other interrupt routing problems. This is with APIC
> > + ACPI, yes? If you disable ACPI, does APIC work or is it not found?
> > Also, if you disable ACPI, does non-APIC work ok?
>
> Yes i get "watchdog timeout" if i use ACPI+APIC.
> Here is my dmesg for current+acpi+apic.
> http://cs.ubbcluj.ro/~dan/current+acpi+apic.txt
> If i disable acpi, the system is not able to boot to the login
> prompt. I did a break
> into debugger after waiting for 15 minutes and i noticed that the
> interrupts for rl0 are increasing very quickly, so i think that is why
> the system is so slow.
> Here is a dmesg for current without ACPI and with APIC, but only in
> single mode
> without if_rl module and many other modules.
> http://cs.ubbcluj.ro/~dan/current+noacpi+apic+singlemode.txt
> And if I disable ACPI i don't see the interrupts storms but i don't
> have ACPI :(
> http://cs.ubbcluj.ro/~dan/current+noacpi+noapic.txt
> And here is current with ACPI and without APIC:
> http://cs.ubbcluj.ro/~dan/current+acpi+noapic.txt
> Thanks,
> Dan
I haven't forgotten about this, I've just been busy. So, I'm still trying to
understand. Correct me if I'm wrong: APIC always gets interrupt storms; it
doesn't matter if ACPI is enabled or disabled. Without APIC, ACPI gives you
interrupt storms, but no ACPI works fine. Is that correct? Do you get
interrupt storms if ACPI is enabled but APIC is not on both current and
RELENG_5?
-- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: John Baldwin: "Re: Timekeeping hosed by factor 3, high lapic[01] interrupt rates"
- Next in thread: Dan Cojocar: "Re: Interrupt storm"
- Reply: Dan Cojocar: "Re: Interrupt storm"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
