All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: xfs: possible circular locking dependency detected
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2008 21:20:24 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081206132023.GA21235@localhost> (raw)

Hi Dave,

I got this warning while accessing xfs on usb storage.
Is this a real problem?

Thanks,
Fengguang

 =======================================================
 [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
 2.6.28-rc7 #85
 -------------------------------------------------------
 rsync/20106 is trying to acquire lock:
  (iprune_mutex){--..}, at: [<ffffffff811070a4>] shrink_icache_memory+0x84/0x290

 but task is already holding lock:
  (&(&ip->i_iolock)->mr_lock){----}, at: [<ffffffffa030fcc5>] xfs_ilock+0x75/0xb0 [xfs]

 which lock already depends on the new lock.


 the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

 -> #1 (&(&ip->i_iolock)->mr_lock){----}:
        [<ffffffff810799b2>] __lock_acquire+0x12e2/0x18c0
        [<ffffffff8107a029>] lock_acquire+0x99/0xd0
        [<ffffffff8106a937>] down_write_nested+0x57/0x90
        [<ffffffffa030fcf5>] xfs_ilock+0xa5/0xb0 [xfs]
        [<ffffffffa030fea6>] xfs_ireclaim+0x46/0x90 [xfs]
        [<ffffffffa032d8de>] xfs_finish_reclaim+0x5e/0x1a0 [xfs]
        [<ffffffffa032dc3b>] xfs_reclaim+0x11b/0x120 [xfs]
        [<ffffffffa033cd4e>] xfs_fs_clear_inode+0xee/0x120 [xfs]
        [<ffffffff81106e50>] clear_inode+0x90/0x140
        [<ffffffff81106f38>] dispose_list+0x38/0x120
        [<ffffffff81107263>] shrink_icache_memory+0x243/0x290
        [<ffffffff810c3ae5>] shrink_slab+0x125/0x180
        [<ffffffff810c4362>] kswapd+0x542/0x6a0
        [<ffffffff8106610e>] kthread+0x4e/0x90
        [<ffffffff8100dc99>] child_rip+0xa/0x11
        [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff

 -> #0 (iprune_mutex){--..}:
        [<ffffffff81079aff>] __lock_acquire+0x142f/0x18c0
        [<ffffffff8107a029>] lock_acquire+0x99/0xd0
        [<ffffffff8148220e>] mutex_lock_nested+0xce/0x320
        [<ffffffff811070a4>] shrink_icache_memory+0x84/0x290
        [<ffffffff810c3ae5>] shrink_slab+0x125/0x180
        [<ffffffff810c4b46>] try_to_free_pages+0x286/0x3f0
        [<ffffffff810bcba5>] __alloc_pages_internal+0x255/0x5b0
        [<ffffffff810e275b>] alloc_pages_current+0x7b/0x100
        [<ffffffff810b5340>] __page_cache_alloc+0x10/0x20
        [<ffffffff810bf0e8>] __do_page_cache_readahead+0x138/0x250
        [<ffffffff810bf2df>] ondemand_readahead+0xdf/0x3c0
        [<ffffffff810bf669>] page_cache_async_readahead+0xa9/0xc0
        [<ffffffff810b5e39>] do_generic_file_read+0x259/0x4d0
        [<ffffffff810b6ff0>] generic_file_aio_read+0xd0/0x1c0
        [<ffffffffa033c5ea>] xfs_read+0x12a/0x280 [xfs]
        [<ffffffffa0337c46>] xfs_file_aio_read+0x56/0x60 [xfs]
        [<ffffffff810f1459>] do_sync_read+0xf9/0x140
        [<ffffffff810f20c8>] vfs_read+0xc8/0x180
        [<ffffffff810f2285>] sys_read+0x55/0x90
        [<ffffffff8100c62a>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
        [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff

 other info that might help us debug this:

 2 locks held by rsync/20106:
  #0:  (&(&ip->i_iolock)->mr_lock){----}, at: [<ffffffffa030fcc5>] xfs_ilock+0x75/0xb0 [xfs]
  #1:  (shrinker_rwsem){----}, at: [<ffffffff810c39f7>] shrink_slab+0x37/0x180

 stack backtrace:
 Pid: 20106, comm: rsync Not tainted 2.6.28-rc7 #85
 Call Trace:
  [<ffffffff81078298>] print_circular_bug_tail+0xd8/0xe0
  [<ffffffff81079aff>] __lock_acquire+0x142f/0x18c0
  [<ffffffff810c0576>] ? __pagevec_release+0x26/0x40
  [<ffffffff8107a029>] lock_acquire+0x99/0xd0
  [<ffffffff811070a4>] ? shrink_icache_memory+0x84/0x290
  [<ffffffff8148220e>] mutex_lock_nested+0xce/0x320
  [<ffffffff811070a4>] ? shrink_icache_memory+0x84/0x290
  [<ffffffff811070a4>] ? shrink_icache_memory+0x84/0x290
  [<ffffffff811070a4>] shrink_icache_memory+0x84/0x290
  [<ffffffff810c3ae5>] shrink_slab+0x125/0x180
  [<ffffffff810c4b46>] try_to_free_pages+0x286/0x3f0
  [<ffffffff810c1640>] ? isolate_pages_global+0x0/0x260
  [<ffffffff810bcba5>] __alloc_pages_internal+0x255/0x5b0
  [<ffffffff810e275b>] alloc_pages_current+0x7b/0x100
  [<ffffffff810b5340>] __page_cache_alloc+0x10/0x20
  [<ffffffff810bf0e8>] __do_page_cache_readahead+0x138/0x250
  [<ffffffff810bf07a>] ? __do_page_cache_readahead+0xca/0x250
  [<ffffffff810bf2df>] ondemand_readahead+0xdf/0x3c0
  [<ffffffff81013e49>] ? sched_clock+0x9/0x10
  [<ffffffff810bf669>] page_cache_async_readahead+0xa9/0xc0
  [<ffffffff810b5e39>] do_generic_file_read+0x259/0x4d0
  [<ffffffff810b47a0>] ? file_read_actor+0x0/0x190
  [<ffffffff810b6ff0>] generic_file_aio_read+0xd0/0x1c0
  [<ffffffffa030fcc5>] ? xfs_ilock+0x75/0xb0 [xfs]
  [<ffffffffa033c5ea>] xfs_read+0x12a/0x280 [xfs]
  [<ffffffffa0337c46>] xfs_file_aio_read+0x56/0x60 [xfs]
  [<ffffffff810f1459>] do_sync_read+0xf9/0x140
  [<ffffffff81066560>] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x40
  [<ffffffff811ecdaf>] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x7f/0xb0
  [<ffffffff81483f9d>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x3a/0x3c
  [<ffffffff810f20c8>] vfs_read+0xc8/0x180
  [<ffffffff810f2285>] sys_read+0x55/0x90
  [<ffffffff8100c62a>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: xfs: possible circular locking dependency detected
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2008 21:20:24 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081206132023.GA21235@localhost> (raw)

Hi Dave,

I got this warning while accessing xfs on usb storage.
Is this a real problem?

Thanks,
Fengguang

 =======================================================
 [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
 2.6.28-rc7 #85
 -------------------------------------------------------
 rsync/20106 is trying to acquire lock:
  (iprune_mutex){--..}, at: [<ffffffff811070a4>] shrink_icache_memory+0x84/0x290

 but task is already holding lock:
  (&(&ip->i_iolock)->mr_lock){----}, at: [<ffffffffa030fcc5>] xfs_ilock+0x75/0xb0 [xfs]

 which lock already depends on the new lock.


 the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

 -> #1 (&(&ip->i_iolock)->mr_lock){----}:
        [<ffffffff810799b2>] __lock_acquire+0x12e2/0x18c0
        [<ffffffff8107a029>] lock_acquire+0x99/0xd0
        [<ffffffff8106a937>] down_write_nested+0x57/0x90
        [<ffffffffa030fcf5>] xfs_ilock+0xa5/0xb0 [xfs]
        [<ffffffffa030fea6>] xfs_ireclaim+0x46/0x90 [xfs]
        [<ffffffffa032d8de>] xfs_finish_reclaim+0x5e/0x1a0 [xfs]
        [<ffffffffa032dc3b>] xfs_reclaim+0x11b/0x120 [xfs]
        [<ffffffffa033cd4e>] xfs_fs_clear_inode+0xee/0x120 [xfs]
        [<ffffffff81106e50>] clear_inode+0x90/0x140
        [<ffffffff81106f38>] dispose_list+0x38/0x120
        [<ffffffff81107263>] shrink_icache_memory+0x243/0x290
        [<ffffffff810c3ae5>] shrink_slab+0x125/0x180
        [<ffffffff810c4362>] kswapd+0x542/0x6a0
        [<ffffffff8106610e>] kthread+0x4e/0x90
        [<ffffffff8100dc99>] child_rip+0xa/0x11
        [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff

 -> #0 (iprune_mutex){--..}:
        [<ffffffff81079aff>] __lock_acquire+0x142f/0x18c0
        [<ffffffff8107a029>] lock_acquire+0x99/0xd0
        [<ffffffff8148220e>] mutex_lock_nested+0xce/0x320
        [<ffffffff811070a4>] shrink_icache_memory+0x84/0x290
        [<ffffffff810c3ae5>] shrink_slab+0x125/0x180
        [<ffffffff810c4b46>] try_to_free_pages+0x286/0x3f0
        [<ffffffff810bcba5>] __alloc_pages_internal+0x255/0x5b0
        [<ffffffff810e275b>] alloc_pages_current+0x7b/0x100
        [<ffffffff810b5340>] __page_cache_alloc+0x10/0x20
        [<ffffffff810bf0e8>] __do_page_cache_readahead+0x138/0x250
        [<ffffffff810bf2df>] ondemand_readahead+0xdf/0x3c0
        [<ffffffff810bf669>] page_cache_async_readahead+0xa9/0xc0
        [<ffffffff810b5e39>] do_generic_file_read+0x259/0x4d0
        [<ffffffff810b6ff0>] generic_file_aio_read+0xd0/0x1c0
        [<ffffffffa033c5ea>] xfs_read+0x12a/0x280 [xfs]
        [<ffffffffa0337c46>] xfs_file_aio_read+0x56/0x60 [xfs]
        [<ffffffff810f1459>] do_sync_read+0xf9/0x140
        [<ffffffff810f20c8>] vfs_read+0xc8/0x180
        [<ffffffff810f2285>] sys_read+0x55/0x90
        [<ffffffff8100c62a>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
        [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff

 other info that might help us debug this:

 2 locks held by rsync/20106:
  #0:  (&(&ip->i_iolock)->mr_lock){----}, at: [<ffffffffa030fcc5>] xfs_ilock+0x75/0xb0 [xfs]
  #1:  (shrinker_rwsem){----}, at: [<ffffffff810c39f7>] shrink_slab+0x37/0x180

 stack backtrace:
 Pid: 20106, comm: rsync Not tainted 2.6.28-rc7 #85
 Call Trace:
  [<ffffffff81078298>] print_circular_bug_tail+0xd8/0xe0
  [<ffffffff81079aff>] __lock_acquire+0x142f/0x18c0
  [<ffffffff810c0576>] ? __pagevec_release+0x26/0x40
  [<ffffffff8107a029>] lock_acquire+0x99/0xd0
  [<ffffffff811070a4>] ? shrink_icache_memory+0x84/0x290
  [<ffffffff8148220e>] mutex_lock_nested+0xce/0x320
  [<ffffffff811070a4>] ? shrink_icache_memory+0x84/0x290
  [<ffffffff811070a4>] ? shrink_icache_memory+0x84/0x290
  [<ffffffff811070a4>] shrink_icache_memory+0x84/0x290
  [<ffffffff810c3ae5>] shrink_slab+0x125/0x180
  [<ffffffff810c4b46>] try_to_free_pages+0x286/0x3f0
  [<ffffffff810c1640>] ? isolate_pages_global+0x0/0x260
  [<ffffffff810bcba5>] __alloc_pages_internal+0x255/0x5b0
  [<ffffffff810e275b>] alloc_pages_current+0x7b/0x100
  [<ffffffff810b5340>] __page_cache_alloc+0x10/0x20
  [<ffffffff810bf0e8>] __do_page_cache_readahead+0x138/0x250
  [<ffffffff810bf07a>] ? __do_page_cache_readahead+0xca/0x250
  [<ffffffff810bf2df>] ondemand_readahead+0xdf/0x3c0
  [<ffffffff81013e49>] ? sched_clock+0x9/0x10
  [<ffffffff810bf669>] page_cache_async_readahead+0xa9/0xc0
  [<ffffffff810b5e39>] do_generic_file_read+0x259/0x4d0
  [<ffffffff810b47a0>] ? file_read_actor+0x0/0x190
  [<ffffffff810b6ff0>] generic_file_aio_read+0xd0/0x1c0
  [<ffffffffa030fcc5>] ? xfs_ilock+0x75/0xb0 [xfs]
  [<ffffffffa033c5ea>] xfs_read+0x12a/0x280 [xfs]
  [<ffffffffa0337c46>] xfs_file_aio_read+0x56/0x60 [xfs]
  [<ffffffff810f1459>] do_sync_read+0xf9/0x140
  [<ffffffff81066560>] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x40
  [<ffffffff811ecdaf>] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x7f/0xb0
  [<ffffffff81483f9d>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x3a/0x3c
  [<ffffffff810f20c8>] vfs_read+0xc8/0x180
  [<ffffffff810f2285>] sys_read+0x55/0x90
  [<ffffffff8100c62a>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

             reply	other threads:[~2008-12-07 13:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-12-06 13:20 Wu Fengguang [this message]
2008-12-06 13:20 ` xfs: possible circular locking dependency detected Wu Fengguang
2008-12-12 22:02 ` Dave Chinner
2008-12-12 22:02   ` Dave Chinner

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=20081206132023.GA21235@localhost \
    --to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=dgc@sgi.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /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.