On 08/04, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 15:37 +0100, David Howells wrote: > > Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > ======================================================= > > > [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ] > > > 2.6.30-test #7 > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > swapper/0 is trying to acquire lock: > > > (&cwq->lock){-.-...}, at: [<c01519f3>] __queue_work+0x1f/0x4e > > > > > > but task is already holding lock: > > > (&q->lock){-.-.-.}, at: [<c012cc9c>] __wake_up+0x26/0x5c > > > > > > which lock already depends on the new lock. > > > > Okay. I think I understand this: > > > > (1) cachefiles_read_waiter() intercepts wake up events, and, as such, is run > > inside the waitqueue spinlock for the page bit waitqueue. > > > > (2) cachefiles_read_waiter() calls fscache_enqueue_retrieval() which calls > > fscache_enqueue_operation() which calls schedule_work() for fast > > operations, thus taking a per-CPU workqueue spinlock. > > > > (3) queue_work(), which is called by many things, calls __queue_work(), which > > takes the per-CPU workqueue spinlock. > > > > (4) __queue_work() then calls insert_work(), which calls wake_up(), which > > takes the waitqueue spinlock for the per-CPU workqueue waitqueue. > > > > Even though the two waitqueues are separate, I think lockdep sees them as > > having the same lock. > > Yeah, it looks like cwq->lock is always in the same lock class. > > Creating a new class for your second workqueue might help, we'd have to > pass a second key through __create_workqueue_key() and pass that into > init_cpu_workqueue() and apply it to cwq->lock using lockdep_set_class() > and co. Agreed. But otoh, it would be nice to kill cwq->more_work and speedup workqueues a bit. We don't actually need wait_queue_head_t, we have a single thread cwq->thread which should be woken. However this change is not completely trivial, we need cwq->please_wakeup_me to avoid unnecessary wakeups inside run_workqueue(). Not sure this worth the trouble. Oleg. -- Linux-cachefs mailing list Linux-cachefs@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cachefs