http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15264 Summary: cpufreq: possible recursive locking detected Product: Power Management Version: 2.5 Kernel Version: 2.6.33-rc5 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Tree: Mainline Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P1 Component: cpufreq AssignedTo: cpufreq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ReportedBy: combuster@xxxxxxxxxxxx Regression: No After waking up from suspend I get this in dmesg: [ 508.708907] ============================================= [ 508.708912] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ] [ 508.708915] 2.6.33-rc5-TESTING-50523-g0d0e2fe-dirty #1 [ 508.708918] --------------------------------------------- [ 508.708921] 94cpufreq/3825 is trying to acquire lock: [ 508.708923] (s_active){++++.+}, at: [<ffffffff8112aedc>] sysfs_addrm_finish+0x31/0x50 [ 508.708935] [ 508.708936] but task is already holding lock: [ 508.708938] (s_active){++++.+}, at: [<ffffffff8112b048>] sysfs_get_active_two+0x1f/0x43 [ 508.708946] [ 508.708947] other info that might help us debug this: [ 508.708950] 4 locks held by 94cpufreq/3825: [ 508.708952] #0: (&buffer->mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81129c4c>] sysfs_write_file+0x37/0x13f [ 508.708961] #1: (s_active){++++.+}, at: [<ffffffff8112b048>] sysfs_get_active_two+0x1f/0x43 [ 508.708969] #2: (s_active){++++.+}, at: [<ffffffff8112b055>] sysfs_get_active_two+0x2c/0x43 [ 508.708977] #3: (dbs_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffa01fdcf7>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x286/0x32b [cpufreq_ondemand] [ 508.708988] [ 508.708989] stack backtrace: [ 508.708993] Pid: 3825, comm: 94cpufreq Not tainted 2.6.33-rc5-TESTING-50523-g0d0e2fe-dirty #1 [ 508.708996] Call Trace: [ 508.709001] [<ffffffff81066c34>] __lock_acquire+0xc8d/0xd09 [ 508.709008] [<ffffffff81065460>] ? mark_held_locks+0x52/0x70 [ 508.709013] [<ffffffff8106587e>] ? debug_check_no_locks_freed+0x12e/0x145 [ 508.709018] [<ffffffff81065716>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x119/0x144 [ 508.709023] [<ffffffff8112aedc>] ? sysfs_addrm_finish+0x31/0x50 [ 508.709027] [<ffffffff81066d91>] lock_acquire+0xe1/0x105 [ 508.709032] [<ffffffff8112aedc>] ? sysfs_addrm_finish+0x31/0x50 [ 508.709037] [<ffffffff8112a951>] sysfs_deactivate+0x86/0xc3 [ 508.709042] [<ffffffff8112aedc>] ? sysfs_addrm_finish+0x31/0x50 [ 508.709048] [<ffffffff8112aedc>] sysfs_addrm_finish+0x31/0x50 [ 508.709053] [<ffffffff811292b9>] sysfs_hash_and_remove+0x4e/0x65 [ 508.709059] [<ffffffff8112c07a>] sysfs_remove_group+0x6c/0xa4 [ 508.709065] [<ffffffffa01fdd0a>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x299/0x32b [cpufreq_ondemand] [ 508.709073] [<ffffffff812658ca>] __cpufreq_governor+0x64/0xa1 [ 508.709078] [<ffffffff81266262>] __cpufreq_set_policy+0xf6/0x151 [ 508.709083] [<ffffffff81266913>] store_scaling_governor+0x190/0x1ca [ 508.709088] [<ffffffff812672e5>] ? handle_update+0x0/0xe [ 508.709093] [<ffffffff81266b28>] store+0x56/0x79 [ 508.709098] [<ffffffff81129d18>] sysfs_write_file+0x103/0x13f [ 508.709104] [<ffffffff810d7295>] vfs_write+0xa9/0x106 [ 508.709109] [<ffffffff81065716>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x119/0x144 [ 508.709113] [<ffffffff810d73a8>] sys_write+0x45/0x69 [ 508.709119] [<ffffffff81002b02>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b Linux vostro 2.6.33-rc5-TESTING-50523-g0d0e2fe-dirty #1 SMP PREEMPT Tue Feb 9 22:22:16 CET 2010 x86_64 Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T5670 @ 1.80GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux I have debug locks in kernel hacking section enabled for another reasons, I found this by reviewing dmesg by accident. I don't have any problems with cpufreq before or after suspending my laptop (Dell Vostro 1310) but though this is something worth reporting. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
