Now that is a fascinating data point. My machine that I've been having issues with has been running a bhyve vm from the beginning. I never made the connection. I'll try throwing some network traffic at the VM and see if I can make it lock up. On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 10:14 AM, Mike Tancsa <mike at sentex.net> wrote:> On 2/22/2018 3:41 PM, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > On 2/21/2018 3:04 PM, Mike Tancsa wrote: > >> Not sure if I have found another issue specific to Ryzen, or a bug that > >> manifests itself on Ryzen systems easier. I installed the latest > >> virtualbox from the ports and was doing some network performance tests > >> between a vm and the hypervisor using iperf3. The guest is just a > >> RELENG11 image and the network is an em nic bridged to epair1b > > > > This looks possibly related to VirtualBox. Doing the same tests and more > > using bhyve, I dont get any lockup. Not to mention, network IO is MUCH > > faster. > > > Actually, it just took a little bit longer to lock up the box with bhyve > on RELENG_11 as the hypervisor. Would be great if anyone can confirm > this locks up their Ryzen boxes ? I tried 2 different boxes to eliminate > a hardware issue. Also tried a similar test on Ubuntu and I can spin up > 4 instances and run without lockups. > > Just grab a copy of > > https://download.freebsd.org/ftp/releases/VM-IMAGES/11.1- > RELEASE/amd64/Latest/FreeBSD-11.1-RELEASE-amd64.raw.xz > > and make 2 copies. tmp.raw and tmp2.raw > > > kldload vmm > ifconfig tap0 create > ifconfig tap1 create > ifconfig tap1 up > ifconfig tap0 up > ifconfig bridge0 create addm tap0 addm tap1 > ifconfig bridge0 192.168.99.1/24 > > screen -d -m sh /usr/share/examples/bhyve/vmrun.sh -c 4 -m 6144M -t tap0 > -d tmp.raw BSD11a > screen -d -m sh /usr/share/examples/bhyve/vmrun.sh -c 4 -m 6144M -t tap1 > -d tmp2.raw BSD11b > > Install netperf on the 2 vms and give the vtnet interface > 192.168.99.2/24 and 192.168.99.3/24 > > In both VMs pkg install iperf3 and start it up as > iperf -s > > In the hypervisor, > iperf -t 10000 -R -c 192.168.99.2 > iperf -t 10000 -c 192.168.99.3 > > > the box locks up solid after 5-20 min. Same hardware with Ubuntu and > virtual box and 4 instances work fine, no lockups after a day so not > sure whats up but it seems to be something with the Ryzen CPU running as > a hypervisor or with some type of load :( > > Prior to lockup I had a stream of netstat -m writing to a file every 5 > seconds. The last entry was below. It doesnt seem to be leak. > > Thu Feb 22 17:14:28 EST 2018 > 8694/10281/18975 mbufs in use (current/cache/total) > 8225/5211/13436/2038424 mbuf clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) > 8225/5184 mbuf+clusters out of packet secondary zone in use (current/cache) > 461/3747/4208/1019211 4k (page size) jumbo clusters in use > (current/cache/total/max) > 0/0/0/301988 9k jumbo clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) > 0/0/0/169868 16k jumbo clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) > 20467K/27980K/48447K bytes allocated to network (current/cache/total) > 0/0/0 requests for mbufs denied (mbufs/clusters/mbuf+clusters) > 0/0/0 requests for mbufs delayed (mbufs/clusters/mbuf+clusters) > 0/0/0 requests for jumbo clusters delayed (4k/9k/16k) > 0/0/0 requests for jumbo clusters denied (4k/9k/16k) > 0 sendfile syscalls > 0 sendfile syscalls completed without I/O request > 0 requests for I/O initiated by sendfile > 0 pages read by sendfile as part of a request > 0 pages were valid at time of a sendfile request > 0 pages were requested for read ahead by applications > 0 pages were read ahead by sendfile > 0 times sendfile encountered an already busy page > 0 requests for sfbufs denied > 0 requests for sfbufs delayed > > > > ---Mike > > > > > -- > ------------------- > Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400 x203 > Sentex Communications, mike at sentex.net > Providing Internet services since 1994 www.sentex.net > Cambridge, Ontario Canada > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable at freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe at freebsd.org" >
Mike Tancsa
2018-Feb-23 20:22 UTC
Ryzen lockup on bhyve was (Re: new Ryzen lockup issue ?)
Actually I can confirm the same sort of hard lockup happens on my Epyc board with RELENG11. It also happens in current. I will file a PR and post on freebsd-current in case someone has any suggestions on how to try and figure out whats going on. I upgraded the box to 12.0-CURRENT #0 r329866 in order to see if it could avoid the lockup, but same deal. The vmm driver does seem different when loaded, but the same lock up under load CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 1600X Six-Core Processor (3593.35-MHz K8-class CPU) Origin="AuthenticAMD" Id=0x800f11 Family=0x17 Model=0x1 Stepping=1 Features=0x178bfbff<FPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CLFLUSH,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,HTT> Features2=0x7ed8320b<SSE3,PCLMULQDQ,MON,SSSE3,FMA,CX16,SSE4.1,SSE4.2,MOVBE,POPCNT,AESNI,XSAVE,OSXSAVE,AVX,F16C,RDRAND> AMD Features=0x2e500800<SYSCALL,NX,MMX+,FFXSR,Page1GB,RDTSCP,LM> AMD Features2=0x35c233ff<LAHF,CMP,SVM,ExtAPIC,CR8,ABM,SSE4A,MAS,Prefetch,OSVW,SKINIT,WDT,TCE,Topology,PCXC,PNXC,DBE,PL2I,MWAITX> Structured Extended Features=0x209c01a9<FSGSBASE,BMI1,AVX2,SMEP,BMI2,RDSEED,ADX,SMAP,CLFLUSHOPT,SHA> XSAVE Features=0xf<XSAVEOPT,XSAVEC,XINUSE,XSAVES> AMD Extended Feature Extensions ID EBX=0x7<CLZERO,IRPerf,XSaveErPtr> SVM: NP,NRIP,VClean,AFlush,DAssist,NAsids=32768 TSC: P-state invariant, performance statistics AMD-Vi: IVRS Info VAsize = 64 PAsize = 48 GVAsize = 2 flags:0 driver bug: Unable to set devclass (class: ppc devname: (unknown)) ivhd0: <AMD-Vi/IOMMU ivhd with EFR> on acpi0 ivhd0: Flag:b0<IotlbSup,Coherent> ivhd0: Features(type:0x11) MsiNumPPR = 0 PNBanks= 2 PNCounters= 0 ivhd0: Extended features[31:0]:22294ada<PPRSup,NXSup,GTSup,IASup> HATS 0x2 GATS = 0x0 GLXSup = 0x1 SmiFSup = 0x1 SmiFRC = 0x2 GAMSup = 0x1 DualPortLogSup = 0x2 DualEventLogSup = 0x2 ivhd0: Extended features[62:32]:f77ef<USSup> Max PASID: 0x2f DevTblSegSup = 0x3 MarcSup = 0x1 ivhd0: supported paging level:7, will use only: 4 ivhd0: device range: 0x0 - 0xffff ivhd0: PCI cap 0x190b640f at 0x40 feature:19<IOTLB,EFR,CapExt> On 2/23/2018 12:35 PM, Nimrod Levy wrote:> Now that is a fascinating data point. My machine that I've been having > issues with has been running a bhyve vm from the beginning.? I never > made the connection. I'll try throwing some network traffic at the VM > and see if I can make it lock up. > > On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 10:14 AM, Mike Tancsa <mike at sentex.net > <mailto:mike at sentex.net>> wrote: > > On 2/22/2018 3:41 PM, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > On 2/21/2018 3:04 PM, Mike Tancsa wrote: > >> Not sure if I have found another issue specific to Ryzen, or a bug that > >> manifests itself on Ryzen systems easier.? I installed the latest > >> virtualbox from the ports and was doing some network performance tests > >> between a vm and the hypervisor using iperf3.? The guest is just a > >> RELENG11 image and the network is an em nic bridged to epair1b > > > > This looks possibly related to VirtualBox. Doing the same tests and more > > using bhyve, I dont get any lockup.? Not to mention, network IO is MUCH > > faster. > > > Actually, it just took a little bit longer to lock up the box with bhyve > on RELENG_11 as the hypervisor.? ?Would be great if anyone can confirm > this locks up their Ryzen boxes ? I tried 2 different boxes to eliminate > a hardware issue.? Also tried a similar test on Ubuntu and I can spin up > 4 instances and run without lockups. > > Just grab a copy of > > https://download.freebsd.org/ftp/releases/VM-IMAGES/11.1-RELEASE/amd64/Latest/FreeBSD-11.1-RELEASE-amd64.raw.xz > <https://download.freebsd.org/ftp/releases/VM-IMAGES/11.1-RELEASE/amd64/Latest/FreeBSD-11.1-RELEASE-amd64.raw.xz> > > and make 2 copies. tmp.raw and tmp2.raw > > > kldload vmm > ifconfig tap0 create > ifconfig tap1 create > ifconfig tap1 up > ifconfig tap0 up > ifconfig bridge0 create addm tap0 addm tap1 > ifconfig bridge0 192.168.99.1/24 <http://192.168.99.1/24> > > screen -d -m sh /usr/share/examples/bhyve/vmrun.sh -c 4 -m 6144M -t tap0 > -d tmp.raw BSD11a > screen -d -m sh /usr/share/examples/bhyve/vmrun.sh -c 4 -m 6144M -t tap1 > -d tmp2.raw BSD11b > > Install netperf on the 2 vms and give the vtnet interface > 192.168.99.2/24 <http://192.168.99.2/24> and 192.168.99.3/24 > <http://192.168.99.3/24> > > In both VMs pkg install iperf3 and start it up as > iperf -s > > In the hypervisor, > iperf -t 10000 -R -c 192.168.99.2 > iperf -t 10000 -c 192.168.99.3 > > > the box locks up solid after 5-20 min.? Same hardware with Ubuntu and > virtual box and 4 instances work fine, no lockups after a day so not > sure whats up but it seems to be something with the Ryzen CPU running as > a hypervisor or with some type of load :( > > Prior to lockup I had a stream of netstat -m writing to a file every 5 > seconds. The last entry was below. It doesnt seem to be leak. > > Thu Feb 22 17:14:28 EST 2018 > 8694/10281/18975 mbufs in use (current/cache/total) > 8225/5211/13436/2038424 mbuf clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) > 8225/5184 mbuf+clusters out of packet secondary zone in use > (current/cache) > 461/3747/4208/1019211 4k (page size) jumbo clusters in use > (current/cache/total/max) > 0/0/0/301988 9k jumbo clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) > 0/0/0/169868 16k jumbo clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) > 20467K/27980K/48447K bytes allocated to network (current/cache/total) > 0/0/0 requests for mbufs denied (mbufs/clusters/mbuf+clusters) > 0/0/0 requests for mbufs delayed (mbufs/clusters/mbuf+clusters) > 0/0/0 requests for jumbo clusters delayed (4k/9k/16k) > 0/0/0 requests for jumbo clusters denied (4k/9k/16k) > 0 sendfile syscalls > 0 sendfile syscalls completed without I/O request > 0 requests for I/O initiated by sendfile > 0 pages read by sendfile as part of a request > 0 pages were valid at time of a sendfile request > 0 pages were requested for read ahead by applications > 0 pages were read ahead by sendfile > 0 times sendfile encountered an already busy page > 0 requests for sfbufs denied > 0 requests for sfbufs delayed > > > > ? ? ? ? ---Mike > > > > > -- > ------------------- > Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400 x203 > <tel:%2B1%20519%20651%203400%20x203> > Sentex Communications, mike at sentex.net <mailto:mike at sentex.net> > Providing Internet services since 1994 www.sentex.net > <http://www.sentex.net> > Cambridge, Ontario Canada > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable at freebsd.org <mailto:freebsd-stable at freebsd.org> > mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe at freebsd.org > <mailto:freebsd-stable-unsubscribe at freebsd.org>" > >-- ------------------- Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400 x203 Sentex Communications, mike at sentex.net Providing Internet services since 1994 www.sentex.net Cambridge, Ontario Canada