Re: schedule WARNING from nfs41_callback_svc

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 5 Jan 2015 15:20:26 -0500
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 3.19-rc2 I'm getting:
> 
> 	[  426.715480] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 7920 at kernel/sched/core.c:7303 __might_sleep+0x92/0xa0()
> 	[  426.715485] do not call blocking ops when !TASK_RUNNING; state=1 set at [<ffffffff810ad99f>] prepare_to_wait+0x2f/0x90
> 	...
> 	[  426.715613]  [<ffffffff81094eb4>] groups_alloc+0x34/0x110
> 	[  426.715638]  [<ffffffffa00181da>] svcauth_unix_accept+0x14a/0x280 [sunrpc]
> 	[  426.715659]  [<ffffffffa00170a8>] svc_authenticate+0xc8/0xe0 [sunrpc]
> 	[  426.715683]  [<ffffffffa0012cf2>] svc_process_common+0x202/0x6d0 [sunrpc]
> 	[  426.715703]  [<ffffffffa00135d8>] bc_svc_process+0x1c8/0x260 [sunrpc]
> 	[  426.715725]  [<ffffffffa01da8e0>] nfs41_callback_svc+0x100/0x1b0 [nfsv4]
> 	...
> 
> Looks like this is a new check added by 8eb23b9f35aa "sched: Debug
> nested sleeps".  I don't *think* it's catching a real problem here, but
> maybe I'm missing some subtlety.  I suppose nfs41_callback_svc() could
> move the finish_wait() so it's done before the bc_svc_process()?
> 

Yeah, the current code looks quite goofy. We really shouldn't be doing
all of the bc_svc_process stuff while in TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE. Doing what
you suggest looks like the right fix to me.

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux USB Development]     [Linux Media Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Info]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux