On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 09:46 -0500, Clark Williams wrote:
> Peter,
>
> I'm getting this warning from lockdep when booting on my T60.
>
> The two addresses reported (0xffffffff812664a2 and 0xffffffff812664ae)
> actually bracket one call to mutex_lock() in driver_attach() so I'm not
> sure what the complaint is.
>
> Clark
>
> =============================================
> [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> 2.6.31-rc5-rt1.1 #37
> ---------------------------------------------
> swapper/1 is trying to acquire lock:
> (&dev->mutex){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff812664ae>]
> __driver_attach+0x48/0x81
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> (&dev->mutex){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff812664a2>]
> __driver_attach+0x3c/0x81
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
> 1 lock held by swapper/1:
> #0: (&dev->mutex){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff812664a2>]
> __driver_attach+0x3c/0x81
Oh, that's tglx who's gone wild with sem->mutex conversions.
It used to be that _all_ dev->sem instances were taken on suspend or
something like that, I think that got fixed a long while back.
I'd have to look at what the current locking requirements for dev->sem
are.
I remember talking to Alan on several occasions about this, and I just
went over some of the old emails, but I must say the precise
requirements stay hidden from me. Also, I'm not sure these emails are
still representative of the current state.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
