All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [locking/lockdep] 15693f040b: WARNING:at_kernel/locking/lockdep.c:#lockdep_free_key_range
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 09:27:37 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1545067657.185366.433.camel@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181217084128.GE23332@shao2-debian>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3711 bytes --]

On Mon, 2018-12-17 at 16:41 +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-4.9):
> 
> commit: 15693f040b149ffff598cc048c2697b258d3901c ("locking/lockdep: Free lock classes that are no longer in use")
> https://github.com/bvanassche/linux for-next
> 
> in testcase: locktorture
> with following parameters:
> 
> 	runtime: 300s
> 	test: cpuhotplug
> 
> test-description: This torture test consists of creating a number of kernel threads which acquire the lock and hold it for specific amount of time, thus simulating different critical region
> behaviors.
> test-url: https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/locking/locktorture.txt
> 
> 
> on test machine: qemu-system-i386 -enable-kvm -cpu SandyBridge -smp 2 -m 512M
> 
> caused below changes (please refer to attached dmesg/kmsg for entire log/backtrace):
> 
> 
> +-------------------------------------------------------------+------------+------------+
> >                                                             | b7001c6cce | 15693f040b |
> 
> +-------------------------------------------------------------+------------+------------+
> > boot_successes                                              | 0          | 0          |
> > boot_failures                                               | 394        | 396        |
> > WARNING:at_lib/debugobjects.c:#__debug_object_init          | 394        | 396        |
> > EIP:__debug_object_init                                     | 394        | 396        |
> > WARNING:possible_circular_locking_dependency_detected       | 370        | 375        |
> > WARNING:at_kernel/locking/lockdep.c:#lock_downgrade         | 145        | 159        |
> > EIP:lock_downgrade                                          | 145        | 159        |
> > BUG:soft_lockup-CPU##stuck_for#s                            | 24         | 21         |
> > EIP:thread_lookup_test                                      | 12         | 9          |
> > Kernel_panic-not_syncing:softlockup:hung_tasks              | 24         | 21         |
> > EIP:memcmp                                                  | 3          | 3          |
> > EIP:threadfunc                                              | 4          | 2          |
> > EIP:lock_acquire                                            | 3          | 1          |
> > EIP:lock_is_held_type                                       | 2          | 2          |
> > WARNING:at_net/sched/sch_generic.c:#dev_watchdog            | 1          |            |
> > EIP:dev_watchdog                                            | 1          |            |
> > WARNING:at_kernel/locking/lockdep.c:#lockdep_free_key_range | 0          | 22         |
> > EIP:lockdep_free_key_range                                  | 0          | 22         |
> > EIP:lock_release                                            | 0          | 2          |
> > EIP:rht_deferred_worker                                     | 0          | 2          |
> 
> +-------------------------------------------------------------+------------+------------+

The WARNING:at_kernel/locking/lockdep.c:#lockdep_free_key_range warnings were caused by the
following code:

	pf = get_pending_free_lock(&flags);
	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!pf))
		return;

Before this report was produced I had already pushed out a new version of my lockdep patch
series to the for-next branch of my github repository in which that code had been modified
into the following:

	pf = get_pending_free_lock(&flags);
	if (!pf)
		return;

Since the above report refers to a WARN_ON_ONCE() statement that has been removed, I think
that this report can be ignored.

Bart.


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>,
	lkp@01.org
Subject: Re: [LKP] [locking/lockdep] 15693f040b: WARNING:at_kernel/locking/lockdep.c:#lockdep_free_key_range
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 09:27:37 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1545067657.185366.433.camel@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181217084128.GE23332@shao2-debian>

On Mon, 2018-12-17 at 16:41 +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-4.9):
> 
> commit: 15693f040b149ffff598cc048c2697b258d3901c ("locking/lockdep: Free lock classes that are no longer in use")
> https://github.com/bvanassche/linux for-next
> 
> in testcase: locktorture
> with following parameters:
> 
> 	runtime: 300s
> 	test: cpuhotplug
> 
> test-description: This torture test consists of creating a number of kernel threads which acquire the lock and hold it for specific amount of time, thus simulating different critical region
> behaviors.
> test-url: https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/locking/locktorture.txt
> 
> 
> on test machine: qemu-system-i386 -enable-kvm -cpu SandyBridge -smp 2 -m 512M
> 
> caused below changes (please refer to attached dmesg/kmsg for entire log/backtrace):
> 
> 
> +-------------------------------------------------------------+------------+------------+
> >                                                             | b7001c6cce | 15693f040b |
> 
> +-------------------------------------------------------------+------------+------------+
> > boot_successes                                              | 0          | 0          |
> > boot_failures                                               | 394        | 396        |
> > WARNING:at_lib/debugobjects.c:#__debug_object_init          | 394        | 396        |
> > EIP:__debug_object_init                                     | 394        | 396        |
> > WARNING:possible_circular_locking_dependency_detected       | 370        | 375        |
> > WARNING:at_kernel/locking/lockdep.c:#lock_downgrade         | 145        | 159        |
> > EIP:lock_downgrade                                          | 145        | 159        |
> > BUG:soft_lockup-CPU##stuck_for#s                            | 24         | 21         |
> > EIP:thread_lookup_test                                      | 12         | 9          |
> > Kernel_panic-not_syncing:softlockup:hung_tasks              | 24         | 21         |
> > EIP:memcmp                                                  | 3          | 3          |
> > EIP:threadfunc                                              | 4          | 2          |
> > EIP:lock_acquire                                            | 3          | 1          |
> > EIP:lock_is_held_type                                       | 2          | 2          |
> > WARNING:at_net/sched/sch_generic.c:#dev_watchdog            | 1          |            |
> > EIP:dev_watchdog                                            | 1          |            |
> > WARNING:at_kernel/locking/lockdep.c:#lockdep_free_key_range | 0          | 22         |
> > EIP:lockdep_free_key_range                                  | 0          | 22         |
> > EIP:lock_release                                            | 0          | 2          |
> > EIP:rht_deferred_worker                                     | 0          | 2          |
> 
> +-------------------------------------------------------------+------------+------------+

The WARNING:at_kernel/locking/lockdep.c:#lockdep_free_key_range warnings were caused by the
following code:

	pf = get_pending_free_lock(&flags);
	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!pf))
		return;

Before this report was produced I had already pushed out a new version of my lockdep patch
series to the for-next branch of my github repository in which that code had been modified
into the following:

	pf = get_pending_free_lock(&flags);
	if (!pf)
		return;

Since the above report refers to a WARN_ON_ONCE() statement that has been removed, I think
that this report can be ignored.

Bart.


  reply	other threads:[~2018-12-17 17:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-17  8:41 [locking/lockdep] 15693f040b: WARNING:at_kernel/locking/lockdep.c:#lockdep_free_key_range kernel test robot
2018-12-17  8:41 ` [LKP] " kernel test robot
2018-12-17 17:27 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2018-12-17 17:27   ` Bart Van Assche

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=1545067657.185366.433.camel@acm.org \
    --to=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=lkp@lists.01.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.