From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>,
jirislaby@gmail.com
Subject: Re: lockdep spew from tty
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 17:31:04 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1369121464.6387.58.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1369099320.6387.33.camel@pasglop>
On Tue, 2013-05-21 at 11:22 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> Hi Greg !
Adding Jiri...
> Caught that on a console today running some 3.10-almost-rc2
> (based on ec50f2a97a4a7098a81b40030e0bfe28bdc43740). Right now I don't
> have the bandwidth to investigate but I though you might be
> interested :-)
>
> I'll take another peek if it happens again.
>
> ======================================================
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 3.10.0-rc1-test #19 Not tainted
> -------------------------------------------------------
> kworker/24:1/1089 is trying to acquire lock:
> (&ldata->output_lock){+.+...}, at: [<c00000000037aa0c>] .process_echoes+0x34/0x2ec
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> ((&buf->work)){+.+...}, at: [<c0000000000778b4>] .process_one_work+0x1f8/0x43c
>
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
>
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>
> -> #2 ((&buf->work)){+.+...}:
> [<c00000000007714c>] .flush_work+0x38/0x258
> [<c0000000000781e4>] .__cancel_work_timer+0xe0/0x140
> [<c0000000003820c4>] .tty_port_destroy+0x14/0x2c
> [<c000000000390d88>] .vc_deallocate+0xfc/0x128
> [<c000000000385d8c>] .vt_ioctl+0xae4/0x13a4
> [<c00000000037a218>] .tty_ioctl+0xd1c/0xe68
> [<c0000000001403b0>] .vfs_ioctl+0x44/0x6c
> [<c000000000140e54>] .do_vfs_ioctl+0x614/0x6ac
> [<c000000000140f30>] .SyS_ioctl+0x44/0x70
> [<c000000000009ca4>] syscall_exit+0x0/0x98
>
> -> #1 (console_lock){+.+.+.}:
> [<c00000000005aeec>] .console_lock+0x80/0x98
> [<c00000000039180c>] .do_con_write.part.16+0x3c/0x1fb0
> [<c0000000003937ec>] .con_write+0x28/0x40
> [<c00000000037b344>] .n_tty_write+0x28c/0x424
> [<c000000000377c84>] .tty_write+0x184/0x238
> [<c00000000012f0ec>] .vfs_write+0xd4/0x1cc
> [<c00000000012f5d0>] .SyS_write+0x48/0x7c
> [<c000000000009ca4>] syscall_exit+0x0/0x98
>
> -> #0 (&ldata->output_lock){+.+...}:
> [<c0000000000a4dc4>] .lock_acquire+0x54/0x70
> [<c000000000705780>] .mutex_lock_nested+0x9c/0x4d4
> [<c00000000037aa0c>] .process_echoes+0x34/0x2ec
> [<c00000000037cc04>] .n_tty_receive_buf+0xc64/0xf90
> [<c000000000380d3c>] .flush_to_ldisc+0x110/0x1ac
> [<c00000000007793c>] .process_one_work+0x280/0x43c
> [<c000000000077d10>] .worker_thread+0x1e0/0x324
> [<c00000000007e360>] .kthread+0xc8/0xd4
> [<c000000000009fac>] .ret_from_kernel_thread+0x5c/0xb0
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> Chain exists of:
> &ldata->output_lock --> console_lock --> (&buf->work)
>
> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> CPU0 CPU1
> ---- ----
> lock((&buf->work));
> lock(console_lock);
> lock((&buf->work));
> lock(&ldata->output_lock);
>
> *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> 2 locks held by kworker/24:1/1089:
> #0: (events){.+.+.+}, at: [<c0000000000778b4>] .process_one_work+0x1f8/0x43c
> #1: ((&buf->work)){+.+...}, at: [<c0000000000778b4>] .process_one_work+0x1f8/0x43c
>
> stack backtrace:
> CPU: 24 PID: 1089 Comm: kworker/24:1 Not tainted 3.10.0-rc1-test #19
> Workqueue: events .flush_to_ldisc
> Call Trace:
> [c000003ed7c37350] [c000000000011b18] .show_stack+0x50/0x14c (unreliable)
> [c000003ed7c37420] [c00000000070eb90] .dump_stack+0x28/0x3c
> [c000003ed7c37490] [c00000000070b16c] .print_circular_bug+0x364/0x374
> [c000003ed7c37540] [c0000000000a4088] .__lock_acquire+0x14d8/0x1d08
> [c000003ed7c37690] [c0000000000a4dc4] .lock_acquire+0x54/0x70
> [c000003ed7c37720] [c000000000705780] .mutex_lock_nested+0x9c/0x4d4
> [c000003ed7c37830] [c00000000037aa0c] .process_echoes+0x34/0x2ec
> [c000003ed7c378f0] [c00000000037cc04] .n_tty_receive_buf+0xc64/0xf90
> [c000003ed7c37aa0] [c000000000380d3c] .flush_to_ldisc+0x110/0x1ac
> [c000003ed7c37b60] [c00000000007793c] .process_one_work+0x280/0x43c
> [c000003ed7c37c20] [c000000000077d10] .worker_thread+0x1e0/0x324
> [c000003ed7c37cd0] [c00000000007e360] .kthread+0xc8/0xd4
>
> Cheers,
> Ben.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-21 7:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-21 1:22 lockdep spew from tty Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2013-05-21 7:31 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2013-05-21 21:03 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2013-05-21 21:46 ` Peter Hurley
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1369121464.6387.58.camel@pasglop \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jirislaby@gmail.com \
--cc=jslaby@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.