On 08/22/2014 04:43 AM, Benjamin Block wrote:
On 08/21/2014 08:52 PM, Benjamin Block wrote:
Hello,
while rebooting one of my dev-machines I stumbled over this
lockdep-mess-up:
=================================
[ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
3.17.0-rc1-00001-gb83ca8c #2 Tainted: G O
---------------------------------
inconsistent {HARDIRQ-ON-W} -> {IN-HARDIRQ-W} usage.
swapper/0/0 [HC1[1]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] takes:
(&(&list->lock)->rlock#3){?.-...}, at: [<ffffffff819580db>] skb_queue_tail+0x2b/0x60
{HARDIRQ-ON-W} state was registered at:
[<ffffffff8111c9f7>] __lock_acquire+0x877/0x1c90
[<ffffffff8111e45a>] lock_acquire+0xca/0x120
[<ffffffff81afc744>] _raw_spin_lock_bh+0x44/0x80
[<ffffffff819a8918>] netlink_poll+0xf8/0x1c0
[<ffffffff8194e031>] sock_poll+0x161/0x190
[<ffffffff81271ffb>] SyS_epoll_ctl+0x51b/0xd10
[<ffffffff81afd452>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
irq event stamp: 1699744
hardirqs last enabled at (1699741): [<ffffffff8189b1d4>] cpuidle_enter_state+0xc4/0x190
hardirqs last disabled at (1699742): [<ffffffff81afdfaa>] common_interrupt+0x6a/0x6f
softirqs last enabled at (1699744): [<ffffffff810d7fda>] _local_bh_enable+0x4a/0x50
softirqs last disabled at (1699743): [<ffffffff810d88f0>] irq_enter+0x30/0x70
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0
----
lock(&(&list->lock)->rlock#3);
<Interrupt>
lock(&(&list->lock)->rlock#3);
*** DEADLOCK ***
no locks held by swapper/0/0.
stack backtrace:
CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Tainted: G O 3.17.0-rc1-00001-gb83ca8c #2
Hardware name: ASUS All Series/Q87T, BIOS 0216 10/16/2013
ffffffff8295a5b0 ffff8802158039a8 ffffffff81af20fa 0000000000000000
ffffffff822164e0 ffff880215803a08 ffffffff81aee400 0000000000000000
ffffffff00000000 ffff880200000001 ffffffff8105ac0f ffffffff82d2abe0
Call Trace:
<IRQ> [<ffffffff81af20fa>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x68
[<ffffffff81aee400>] print_usage_bug+0x1ec/0x1fd
[<ffffffff8105ac0f>] ? save_stack_trace+0x2f/0x50
[<ffffffff8111b600>] ? print_irq_inversion_bug+0x200/0x200
[<ffffffff8111c061>] mark_lock+0x191/0x2b0
[<ffffffff8111c96a>] __lock_acquire+0x7ea/0x1c90
[<ffffffff8111ca94>] ? __lock_acquire+0x914/0x1c90
[<ffffffff8111b600>] ? print_irq_inversion_bug+0x200/0x200
[<ffffffff8111ca94>] ? __lock_acquire+0x914/0x1c90
[<ffffffff8111e45a>] lock_acquire+0xca/0x120
[<ffffffff819580db>] ? skb_queue_tail+0x2b/0x60
[<ffffffff81afc590>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x50/0x90
[<ffffffff819580db>] ? skb_queue_tail+0x2b/0x60
[<ffffffff819580db>] skb_queue_tail+0x2b/0x60
[<ffffffff819a774f>] __netlink_sendskb+0x21f/0x250
[<ffffffff819a7d63>] netlink_broadcast_filtered+0x273/0x3b0
[<ffffffff819a7ebd>] netlink_broadcast+0x1d/0x20
[<ffffffff8152fb8a>] ? nla_reserve+0x2a/0x40
[<ffffffff81589728>] acpi_bus_generate_netlink_event+0x160/0x178
[<ffffffff815a8db9>] acpi_button_notify+0xe1/0xec
[<ffffffff81580648>] acpi_device_notify+0x19/0x1b
[<ffffffff81580662>] acpi_device_notify_fixed+0x18/0x1c
[<ffffffff8158f039>] acpi_ev_fixed_event_detect+0xe6/0x10d
[<ffffffff8159157a>] acpi_ev_sci_xrupt_handler+0x19/0x3f
[<ffffffff8157c1a9>] acpi_irq+0x16/0x31
[<ffffffff81131e2a>] handle_irq_event_percpu+0x6a/0x1d0
[<ffffffff81131fd8>] handle_irq_event+0x48/0x70
[<ffffffff8113534f>] ? handle_fasteoi_irq+0x2f/0x160
[<ffffffff811353e7>] handle_fasteoi_irq+0xc7/0x160
[<ffffffff8104cd94>] handle_irq+0x134/0x150
[<ffffffff810f4876>] ? atomic_notifier_call_chain+0x16/0x20
[<ffffffff81054dec>] ? __exit_idle+0x2c/0x30
[<ffffffff81affe7e>] do_IRQ+0x5e/0x100
[<ffffffff81afdfaf>] common_interrupt+0x6f/0x6f
<EOI> [<ffffffff8189b1df>] ? cpuidle_enter_state+0xcf/0x190
[<ffffffff8189b1d4>] ? cpuidle_enter_state+0xc4/0x190
[<ffffffff8189b387>] cpuidle_enter+0x17/0x20
[<ffffffff81111ae1>] cpu_startup_entry+0x3a1/0x3c0
[<ffffffff81ae92a4>] rest_init+0xc4/0xd0
[<ffffffff81ae91e5>] ? rest_init+0x5/0xd0
[<ffffffff825718a1>] ? ftrace_init+0xa8/0x13b
[<ffffffff8255103a>] start_kernel+0x461/0x46e
[<ffffffff82550939>] ? set_init_arg+0x57/0x57
[<ffffffff825505af>] x86_64_start_reservations+0x2a/0x2c
[<ffffffff825506ae>] x86_64_start_kernel+0xfd/0x101
Sadly I couldn't reproduce it. This looks all to be very general
functions and my best guess is, netlink_poll() needs to be irq-save.
Thing is, the corresponding code is quite old and I can't really bisec
it, because the none-reproducibility.
Thinking more about it.. this seems to be unlikely. More like the
acpi-irq chain should not do netlink-events still in irq-context - just
guessing here, sry :).
Hi Benjamin:
Basically, I think ACPI fixed button device's notify callback should not run in
the interrupt context. This prevents calling function with mutex lock(E,G
evaluating ACPI method). I will write a patch to do that.
I tracked around a little and came up with more recent commits in that
call-chain:
commit 0bf6368ee8f25826d0645c0f7a4f17c8845356a4
- adds acpi_bus_generate_netlink_event to the chain
Again, all other places around the chain seems quit old or unrelated.
There is only the small ipv6-fib patch applied, I send in earlier today
(https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/21/506). This should have nothing to do
with this here.
- Benjamin
--
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
