On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 13:11 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > > ACPI: Core revision 20070126 > > +INFO: trying to register non-static key. > > +the code is fine but needs lockdep annotation. > > +turning off the locking correctness validator. > > +Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.25-rc5-mm1-testing #3 > > + [<c014321e>] __lock_acquire+0x144/0xb6e > > + [<c010b1a2>] ? native_sched_clock+0xe0/0xff > > + [<c017fc57>] ? kmem_cache_alloc+0x89/0xc9 > > + [<c0142ce0>] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xe8/0x11d > > + [<c014404f>] lock_acquire+0x6a/0x90 > > + [<c013b460>] ? down_trylock+0xc/0x27 > > + [<c03016cb>] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x42/0x72 > > + [<c013b460>] ? down_trylock+0xc/0x27 > > + [<c013b460>] down_trylock+0xc/0x27 > > + [<c021fa65>] acpi_os_wait_semaphore+0x67/0x13d > > + [<c023a39e>] acpi_ut_acquire_mutex+0x65/0xcf > > + [<c0230261>] acpi_ns_root_initialize+0x1a/0x289 > > + [<c043ad54>] acpi_initialize_subsystem+0x47/0x6a > > + [<c043afd4>] acpi_early_init+0x57/0xf8 > > + [<c04248ff>] start_kernel+0x34d/0x35a > > + [<c0424019>] i386_start_kernel+0x8/0xa > > + ======================= > > ACPI: Checking initramfs for custom DSDT > > Parsing all Control Methods: > > Table [DSDT](id 0001) - 637 Objects with 63 Devices 160 Methods 41 > > Regions > > Hi Tim, > > Again, thanks for the excellent bug reporting. > > This is actually a different problem (and not my code again, thank > goodness). I think a few of these got fixed in current -mm. According > to Peter Z, these mean: > > > It means the lock_class_key ended up in non-static storage. > > > > In practise it often means you initialized a on-stack structure > > incorrectly. DECLARE_WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD() vs > > DECLARE_WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD_ONSTACK() for example. > > So, this looks like an on-stack ACPI structure that got initialized > wrongly. At least we already have those dudes on the cc. :) Actually looks like the semaphore thing again, its a spinlock inside of down_tylock(). > But, this might also get fixed by reverting the patch as Linus just did. > It might just be best to wait for another -mm release and see how it > settles out. Looks like another of the semaphore thingies.. Does this go away once you apply the semaphore lockdep fixup from here: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/3/12/63 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
