On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 03:21:16AM -0700, Christian Kujau wrote: > Hi, > > I haven't run vanilla for a while, so this is pretty much a copy of > what I reported[0] back with 3.14-rc2, but now with 3.15-rc2. Full > dmesg & .config can be found here: > > http://nerdbynature.de/bits/3.15-rc2/ > > > ====================================================== > [ INFO: RECLAIM_FS-safe -> RECLAIM_FS-unsafe lock order detected ] > 3.15.0-rc2 #1 Not tainted > ------------------------------------------------------ > rm/8288 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] is trying to acquire: > (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}, at: [<c00b16ac>] might_fault+0x58/0xa0 > > and this task is already holding: > (&xfs_dir_ilock_class){++++-.}, at: [<c020f790>] > xfs_ilock_data_map_shared+0x28/0x70 > which would create a new lock dependency: > (&xfs_dir_ilock_class){++++-.} -> (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++} > > but this new dependency connects a RECLAIM_FS-irq-safe lock: > (&xfs_dir_ilock_class){++++-.} > ... which became RECLAIM_FS-irq-safe at: > [<c00658a4>] lock_acquire+0x54/0x70 > [<c00600f0>] down_write_nested+0x50/0xa0 > [<c01cef9c>] xfs_reclaim_inode+0x108/0x318 > [<c01cf360>] xfs_reclaim_inodes_ag+0x1b4/0x360 > [<c01cfea4>] xfs_reclaim_inodes_nr+0x38/0x4c > [<c00d2d00>] super_cache_scan+0x150/0x158 > [<c00a2110>] shrink_slab_node+0x138/0x228 > [<c00a2874>] shrink_slab+0x124/0x13c > [<c00a53f4>] kswapd+0x3f8/0x884 > [<c004e654>] kthread+0xbc/0xd0 > [<c0010b7c>] ret_from_kernel_thread+0x5c/0x64 > to a RECLAIM_FS-irq-unsafe lock: > (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++} > ... which became RECLAIM_FS-irq-unsafe at: > ... [<c0065f94>] lockdep_trace_alloc+0x84/0x104 > [<c00cb630>] kmem_cache_alloc+0x30/0x148 > [<c00ba038>] mmap_region+0x2fc/0x578 > [<c00ba5a0>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ec/0x378 > [<c00aacf8>] vm_mmap_pgoff+0x58/0x94 > [<c012124c>] load_elf_binary+0x488/0x11f4 > [<c00d5b48>] search_binary_handler+0x98/0x1f4 > [<c00d6abc>] do_execve+0x484/0x580 > [<c000425c>] try_to_run_init_process+0x18/0x58 > [<c0004a5c>] kernel_init+0xac/0x110 > [<c0010b7c>] ret_from_kernel_thread+0x5c/0x64 > > other info that might help us debug this: > > Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario: > > CPU0 CPU1 > ---- ---- > lock(&mm->mmap_sem); > local_irq_disable(); > lock(&xfs_dir_ilock_class); > lock(&mm->mmap_sem); > <Interrupt> > lock(&xfs_dir_ilock_class); Known false positive. Directory inodes can't be mmap()d or execv()d, nor can referenced inodes be reclaimed. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
