On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 8:00 PM, Theodore Tso<tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 09:46:08AM -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. > > I'm getting a different lockdep warning when booting on my T400 using > 2.6.31-rc5; not sure if it's related or not.... > > In any case, it's screwing up the ability for lockdep to find any > other problems. > > [ 0.297775] INFO: trying to register non-static key. > [ 0.297775] the code is fine but needs lockdep annotation. > [ 0.297775] turning off the locking correctness validator. > [ 0.297775] Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.31-rc5-00256-gf124845 #4 > [ 0.297775] Call Trace: > [ 0.297775] [<c0511a2f>] ? printk+0x14/0x1d > [ 0.297775] [<c016de1f>] register_lock_class+0x5a/0x2a1 > [ 0.297775] [<c016e932>] ? mark_lock+0x1e/0x1e4 > [ 0.297775] [<c016f673>] __lock_acquire+0x9c/0xb1e > [ 0.297775] [<c01be910>] ? mod_zone_page_state+0x9f/0xaf > [ 0.297775] [<c016ed98>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x103/0x124 > [ 0.297775] [<c016e932>] ? mark_lock+0x1e/0x1e4 > [ 0.297775] [<c016eb3b>] ? mark_held_locks+0x43/0x5b > [ 0.297775] [<c01d490f>] ? kmem_cache_alloc+0xaf/0x127 > [ 0.297775] [<c016ed98>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x103/0x124 > [ 0.297775] [<c0170189>] lock_acquire+0x94/0xb7 > [ 0.297775] [<c045d6bd>] ? alloc_netdev_mq+0x105/0x1cc > [ 0.297775] [<c0513f8d>] _spin_lock_bh+0x28/0x58 > [ 0.297775] [<c045d6bd>] ? alloc_netdev_mq+0x105/0x1cc > [ 0.297775] [<c045d6bd>] alloc_netdev_mq+0x105/0x1cc > [ 0.297775] [<c03f7bbf>] ? loopback_setup+0x0/0x79 > [ 0.297775] [<c03f7c6f>] loopback_net_init+0x25/0x68 > [ 0.297782] [<c0457317>] register_pernet_operations+0x2f/0xa1 > [ 0.297832] [<c0512fcd>] ? mutex_lock_nested+0x33/0x3b > [ 0.297891] [<c0457435>] register_pernet_device+0x24/0x4c > [ 0.297951] [<c0796a09>] net_dev_init+0x101/0x150 > [ 0.298010] [<c0796908>] ? net_dev_init+0x0/0x150 > [ 0.298069] [<c010115c>] do_one_initcall+0x6a/0x177 > [ 0.298127] [<c016e932>] ? mark_lock+0x1e/0x1e4 > [ 0.298185] [<c016e932>] ? mark_lock+0x1e/0x1e4 > [ 0.298244] [<c01b371a>] ? get_page_from_freelist+0x28f/0x3be > [ 0.298304] [<c016ed98>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x103/0x124 > [ 0.298364] [<c016edc4>] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xb/0xd > [ 0.298423] [<c016e932>] ? mark_lock+0x1e/0x1e4 > [ 0.298482] [<c016e932>] ? mark_lock+0x1e/0x1e4 > [ 0.298540] [<c016edc4>] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xb/0xd > [ 0.298600] [<c03104ad>] ? ida_get_new_above+0x157/0x171 > [ 0.298660] [<c0213468>] ? proc_register+0x14b/0x15c > [ 0.298719] [<c011e5f6>] ? sched_clock+0x8/0xb > [ 0.298777] [<c016d9b1>] ? lock_release_holdtime+0x30/0x131 > [ 0.298837] [<c0213468>] ? proc_register+0x14b/0x15c > [ 0.298896] [<c0513dfb>] ? _spin_unlock+0x22/0x25 > [ 0.298954] [<c0213468>] ? proc_register+0x14b/0x15c > [ 0.299013] [<c021359b>] ? create_proc_entry+0x80/0x96 > [ 0.299073] [<c0191064>] ? register_irq_proc+0x91/0xad > [ 0.299132] [<c01910d8>] ? init_irq_proc+0x58/0x65 > [ 0.299191] [<c0768301>] kernel_init+0x131/0x182 > [ 0.299249] [<c07681d0>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x182 > It's a different problem, for this issue please see: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/5/49 http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/5/51 -- Regards dave -- 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
