On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 10:43:35AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 06:31:09PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > > Not sure if I've reported this already (it looks familiar, though I've not managed > > to find it in my sent mail folder). This is rc8 + a diff to fix the stack usage reports > > I was seeing (diff at http://paste.fedoraproject.org/89854/13210913/raw) > > > > ====================================================== > > [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ] > > 3.14.0-rc8+ #153 Not tainted > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > git/32710 is trying to acquire lock: > > (&(&ip->i_lock)->mr_lock){++++.+}, at: [<ffffffffc03bd782>] xfs_ilock+0x122/0x250 [xfs] > > > > but task is already holding lock: > > (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}, at: [<ffffffffae7b816a>] __do_page_fault+0x14a/0x610 > > > > which lock already depends on the new lock. > > filldir on a directory inode vs page fault on regular file. Known > issue, definitely a false positive. ah yeah, thought it looked familiar. I think I reported this last summer. > We have to change locking > algorithms to avoid such deficiencies of lockdep (a case of "lockdep > considered harmful", perhaps?) so it's not something I'm about to > rush... Bummer, as it makes lockdep useless on my test box using xfs because it disables itself after hitting this very quickly. (I re-enabled it a couple days ago wondering why I'd left it turned off, chances are it was because of this) Dave _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
