From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Alessio Igor Bogani <abogani@texware.it>,
Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>,
ReiserFS Development List <reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [tree] latest kill-the-BKL tree, v12
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 01:07:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090415230736.GA22710@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a4423d670904151558r4252c7eamd115793fb36a9163@mail.gmail.com>
* Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/4/14 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>:
> >
> > * Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 05:34:22AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrot=
e:
> >> > Ingo,
> >> >
> >> > This small patchset fixes some deadlocks I've faced after trying
> >> > some pressures with dbench on a reiserfs partition.
> >> >
> >> > There is still some work pending such as adding some checks to e=
nsure we
> >> > _always_ release the lock before sleeping, as you suggested.
> >> > Also I have to fix a lockdep warning reported by Alessio Igor Bo=
gani.
> >> > And also some optimizations....
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Frederic.
> >> >
> >> > Frederic Weisbecker (3):
> >> > =A0 kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: provide a tool to lock only once the =
write lock
> >> > =A0 kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: lock only once in reiserfs_truncate_f=
ile
> >> > =A0 kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: only acquire the write lock once in
> >> > =A0 =A0 reiserfs_dirty_inode
> >> >
> >> > =A0fs/reiserfs/inode.c =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 | =A0 10 +++++++---
> >> > =A0fs/reiserfs/lock.c =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0| =A0 26 ++++++++++++++=
++++++++++++
> >> > =A0fs/reiserfs/super.c =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 | =A0 15 +++++++++------
> >> > =A0include/linux/reiserfs_fs.h | =A0 =A02 ++
> >> > =A04 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >> >
> >>
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> The same test - dbench on reiserfs on loop on sparc64.
> >>
> >> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> >> 2.6.30-rc1-00457-gb21597d-dirty #2
> >
> > I'm wondering ... your version hash suggests you used vanilla
> > upstream as a base for your test. There's a string of other fixes
> > from Frederic in tip:core/kill-the-BKL branch, have you picked them
> > all up when you did your testing?
> >
> > The most coherent way to test this would be to pick up the latest
> > core/kill-the-BKL git tree from:
> >
> > =A0 git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/linux-2.6-tip=
=2Egit core/kill-the-BKL
> >
>=20
> I did not know about this branch, now I am testing it and there is=20
> no more problem with that testcase (dbench).
>=20
> I will continue testing.
thanks for testing it! It seems reiserfs with Frederic's changes=20
appears to be more stable now on your system.
I saw your NFS circular locking kill-the-BKL problem report on LKML=20
- also attached below.
Hopefully someone on the Cc: list with NFS experience can point out=20
the BKL assumption that is causing this.
Ingo
----- Forwarded message from Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com=
> -----
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 22:08:01 +0400
=46rom: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [core/kill-the-BKL] nfs3: possible circular locking dependency
Hi
I have pulled core/kill-the-BKL on top of 2.6.30-rc2.
device: '0:18': device_add
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
2.6.30-rc2-00057-g30aa902-dirty #5
-------------------------------------------------------
mount.nfs/1740 is trying to acquire lock:
(kernel_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<00000000006f32dc>] lock_kernel+0x28/0x3c
but task is already holding lock:
(&type->s_umount_key#24/1){+.+.+.}, at: [<00000000004b88a0>] sget+0x22=
8/0x36c
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #1 (&type->s_umount_key#24/1){+.+.+.}:
[<00000000004776d0>] lock_acquire+0x5c/0x74
[<0000000000469f5c>] down_write_nested+0x38/0x50
[<00000000004b88a0>] sget+0x228/0x36c
[<00000000005688fc>] nfs_get_sb+0x80c/0xa7c
[<00000000004b7ec8>] vfs_kern_mount+0x44/0xa4
[<00000000004b7f84>] do_kern_mount+0x30/0xcc
[<00000000004cf300>] do_mount+0x7c8/0x80c
[<00000000004ed2a4>] compat_sys_mount+0x224/0x274
[<0000000000406154>] linux_sparc_syscall32+0x34/0x40
-> #0 (kernel_mutex){+.+.+.}:
[<00000000004776d0>] lock_acquire+0x5c/0x74
[<00000000006f0ebc>] mutex_lock_nested+0x48/0x380
[<00000000006f32dc>] lock_kernel+0x28/0x3c
[<00000000006d20ec>] rpc_wait_bit_killable+0x64/0x8c
[<00000000006f0620>] __wait_on_bit+0x64/0xc0
[<00000000006f06e4>] out_of_line_wait_on_bit+0x68/0x7c
[<00000000006d2938>] __rpc_execute+0x150/0x2b4
[<00000000006d2ac0>] rpc_execute+0x24/0x34
[<00000000006cc338>] rpc_run_task+0x64/0x74
[<00000000006cc474>] rpc_call_sync+0x58/0x7c
[<00000000005717b0>] nfs3_rpc_wrapper+0x24/0xa0
[<0000000000572024>] do_proc_get_root+0x6c/0x10c
[<00000000005720dc>] nfs3_proc_get_root+0x18/0x5c
[<000000000056401c>] nfs_get_root+0x34/0x17c
[<0000000000568adc>] nfs_get_sb+0x9ec/0xa7c
[<00000000004b7ec8>] vfs_kern_mount+0x44/0xa4
[<00000000004b7f84>] do_kern_mount+0x30/0xcc
[<00000000004cf300>] do_mount+0x7c8/0x80c
[<00000000004ed2a4>] compat_sys_mount+0x224/0x274
[<0000000000406154>] linux_sparc_syscall32+0x34/0x40
other info that might help us debug this:
1 lock held by mount.nfs/1740:
#0: (&type->s_umount_key#24/1){+.+.+.}, at: [<00000000004b88a0>]
sget+0x228/0x36c
stack backtrace:
Call Trace:
[00000000004755ac] print_circular_bug_tail+0xfc/0x10c
[0000000000476e24] __lock_acquire+0x12f0/0x1b40
[00000000004776d0] lock_acquire+0x5c/0x74
[00000000006f0ebc] mutex_lock_nested+0x48/0x380
[00000000006f32dc] lock_kernel+0x28/0x3c
[00000000006d20ec] rpc_wait_bit_killable+0x64/0x8c
[00000000006f0620] __wait_on_bit+0x64/0xc0
[00000000006f06e4] out_of_line_wait_on_bit+0x68/0x7c
[00000000006d2938] __rpc_execute+0x150/0x2b4
[00000000006d2ac0] rpc_execute+0x24/0x34
[00000000006cc338] rpc_run_task+0x64/0x74
[00000000006cc474] rpc_call_sync+0x58/0x7c
[00000000005717b0] nfs3_rpc_wrapper+0x24/0xa0
[0000000000572024] do_proc_get_root+0x6c/0x10c
[00000000005720dc] nfs3_proc_get_root+0x18/0x5c
[000000000056401c] nfs_get_root+0x34/0x17c
device: '0:19': device_add
----- End forwarded message -----
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-deve=
l" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Alessio Igor Bogani <abogani@texware.it>,
Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>,
ReiserFS Development List <reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [tree] latest kill-the-BKL tree, v12
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 01:07:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090415230736.GA22710@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a4423d670904151558r4252c7eamd115793fb36a9163@mail.gmail.com>
* Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/4/14 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>:
> >
> > * Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 05:34:22AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >> > Ingo,
> >> >
> >> > This small patchset fixes some deadlocks I've faced after trying
> >> > some pressures with dbench on a reiserfs partition.
> >> >
> >> > There is still some work pending such as adding some checks to ensure we
> >> > _always_ release the lock before sleeping, as you suggested.
> >> > Also I have to fix a lockdep warning reported by Alessio Igor Bogani.
> >> > And also some optimizations....
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Frederic.
> >> >
> >> > Frederic Weisbecker (3):
> >> > kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: provide a tool to lock only once the write lock
> >> > kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: lock only once in reiserfs_truncate_file
> >> > kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: only acquire the write lock once in
> >> > reiserfs_dirty_inode
> >> >
> >> > fs/reiserfs/inode.c | 10 +++++++---
> >> > fs/reiserfs/lock.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> > fs/reiserfs/super.c | 15 +++++++++------
> >> > include/linux/reiserfs_fs.h | 2 ++
> >> > 4 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >> >
> >>
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> The same test - dbench on reiserfs on loop on sparc64.
> >>
> >> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> >> 2.6.30-rc1-00457-gb21597d-dirty #2
> >
> > I'm wondering ... your version hash suggests you used vanilla
> > upstream as a base for your test. There's a string of other fixes
> > from Frederic in tip:core/kill-the-BKL branch, have you picked them
> > all up when you did your testing?
> >
> > The most coherent way to test this would be to pick up the latest
> > core/kill-the-BKL git tree from:
> >
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/linux-2.6-tip.git core/kill-the-BKL
> >
>
> I did not know about this branch, now I am testing it and there is
> no more problem with that testcase (dbench).
>
> I will continue testing.
thanks for testing it! It seems reiserfs with Frederic's changes
appears to be more stable now on your system.
I saw your NFS circular locking kill-the-BKL problem report on LKML
- also attached below.
Hopefully someone on the Cc: list with NFS experience can point out
the BKL assumption that is causing this.
Ingo
----- Forwarded message from Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com> -----
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 22:08:01 +0400
From: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [core/kill-the-BKL] nfs3: possible circular locking dependency
Hi
I have pulled core/kill-the-BKL on top of 2.6.30-rc2.
device: '0:18': device_add
=======================================================
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
2.6.30-rc2-00057-g30aa902-dirty #5
-------------------------------------------------------
mount.nfs/1740 is trying to acquire lock:
(kernel_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<00000000006f32dc>] lock_kernel+0x28/0x3c
but task is already holding lock:
(&type->s_umount_key#24/1){+.+.+.}, at: [<00000000004b88a0>] sget+0x228/0x36c
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #1 (&type->s_umount_key#24/1){+.+.+.}:
[<00000000004776d0>] lock_acquire+0x5c/0x74
[<0000000000469f5c>] down_write_nested+0x38/0x50
[<00000000004b88a0>] sget+0x228/0x36c
[<00000000005688fc>] nfs_get_sb+0x80c/0xa7c
[<00000000004b7ec8>] vfs_kern_mount+0x44/0xa4
[<00000000004b7f84>] do_kern_mount+0x30/0xcc
[<00000000004cf300>] do_mount+0x7c8/0x80c
[<00000000004ed2a4>] compat_sys_mount+0x224/0x274
[<0000000000406154>] linux_sparc_syscall32+0x34/0x40
-> #0 (kernel_mutex){+.+.+.}:
[<00000000004776d0>] lock_acquire+0x5c/0x74
[<00000000006f0ebc>] mutex_lock_nested+0x48/0x380
[<00000000006f32dc>] lock_kernel+0x28/0x3c
[<00000000006d20ec>] rpc_wait_bit_killable+0x64/0x8c
[<00000000006f0620>] __wait_on_bit+0x64/0xc0
[<00000000006f06e4>] out_of_line_wait_on_bit+0x68/0x7c
[<00000000006d2938>] __rpc_execute+0x150/0x2b4
[<00000000006d2ac0>] rpc_execute+0x24/0x34
[<00000000006cc338>] rpc_run_task+0x64/0x74
[<00000000006cc474>] rpc_call_sync+0x58/0x7c
[<00000000005717b0>] nfs3_rpc_wrapper+0x24/0xa0
[<0000000000572024>] do_proc_get_root+0x6c/0x10c
[<00000000005720dc>] nfs3_proc_get_root+0x18/0x5c
[<000000000056401c>] nfs_get_root+0x34/0x17c
[<0000000000568adc>] nfs_get_sb+0x9ec/0xa7c
[<00000000004b7ec8>] vfs_kern_mount+0x44/0xa4
[<00000000004b7f84>] do_kern_mount+0x30/0xcc
[<00000000004cf300>] do_mount+0x7c8/0x80c
[<00000000004ed2a4>] compat_sys_mount+0x224/0x274
[<0000000000406154>] linux_sparc_syscall32+0x34/0x40
other info that might help us debug this:
1 lock held by mount.nfs/1740:
#0: (&type->s_umount_key#24/1){+.+.+.}, at: [<00000000004b88a0>]
sget+0x228/0x36c
stack backtrace:
Call Trace:
[00000000004755ac] print_circular_bug_tail+0xfc/0x10c
[0000000000476e24] __lock_acquire+0x12f0/0x1b40
[00000000004776d0] lock_acquire+0x5c/0x74
[00000000006f0ebc] mutex_lock_nested+0x48/0x380
[00000000006f32dc] lock_kernel+0x28/0x3c
[00000000006d20ec] rpc_wait_bit_killable+0x64/0x8c
[00000000006f0620] __wait_on_bit+0x64/0xc0
[00000000006f06e4] out_of_line_wait_on_bit+0x68/0x7c
[00000000006d2938] __rpc_execute+0x150/0x2b4
[00000000006d2ac0] rpc_execute+0x24/0x34
[00000000006cc338] rpc_run_task+0x64/0x74
[00000000006cc474] rpc_call_sync+0x58/0x7c
[00000000005717b0] nfs3_rpc_wrapper+0x24/0xa0
[0000000000572024] do_proc_get_root+0x6c/0x10c
[00000000005720dc] nfs3_proc_get_root+0x18/0x5c
[000000000056401c] nfs_get_root+0x34/0x17c
device: '0:19': device_add
----- End forwarded message -----
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Alessio Igor Bogani <abogani@texware.it>,
Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>,
ReiserFS Development List <reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [tree] latest kill-the-BKL tree, v12
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 01:07:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090415230736.GA22710@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a4423d670904151558r4252c7eamd115793fb36a9163@mail.gmail.com>
* Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/4/14 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>:
> >
> > * Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 05:34:22AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >> > Ingo,
> >> >
> >> > This small patchset fixes some deadlocks I've faced after trying
> >> > some pressures with dbench on a reiserfs partition.
> >> >
> >> > There is still some work pending such as adding some checks to ensure we
> >> > _always_ release the lock before sleeping, as you suggested.
> >> > Also I have to fix a lockdep warning reported by Alessio Igor Bogani.
> >> > And also some optimizations....
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Frederic.
> >> >
> >> > Frederic Weisbecker (3):
> >> > kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: provide a tool to lock only once the write lock
> >> > kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: lock only once in reiserfs_truncate_file
> >> > kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: only acquire the write lock once in
> >> > reiserfs_dirty_inode
> >> >
> >> > fs/reiserfs/inode.c | 10 +++++++---
> >> > fs/reiserfs/lock.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> > fs/reiserfs/super.c | 15 +++++++++------
> >> > include/linux/reiserfs_fs.h | 2 ++
> >> > 4 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >> >
> >>
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> The same test - dbench on reiserfs on loop on sparc64.
> >>
> >> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> >> 2.6.30-rc1-00457-gb21597d-dirty #2
> >
> > I'm wondering ... your version hash suggests you used vanilla
> > upstream as a base for your test. There's a string of other fixes
> > from Frederic in tip:core/kill-the-BKL branch, have you picked them
> > all up when you did your testing?
> >
> > The most coherent way to test this would be to pick up the latest
> > core/kill-the-BKL git tree from:
> >
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/linux-2.6-tip.git core/kill-the-BKL
> >
>
> I did not know about this branch, now I am testing it and there is
> no more problem with that testcase (dbench).
>
> I will continue testing.
thanks for testing it! It seems reiserfs with Frederic's changes
appears to be more stable now on your system.
I saw your NFS circular locking kill-the-BKL problem report on LKML
- also attached below.
Hopefully someone on the Cc: list with NFS experience can point out
the BKL assumption that is causing this.
Ingo
----- Forwarded message from Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com> -----
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 22:08:01 +0400
From: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [core/kill-the-BKL] nfs3: possible circular locking dependency
Hi
I have pulled core/kill-the-BKL on top of 2.6.30-rc2.
device: '0:18': device_add
=======================================================
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
2.6.30-rc2-00057-g30aa902-dirty #5
-------------------------------------------------------
mount.nfs/1740 is trying to acquire lock:
(kernel_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<00000000006f32dc>] lock_kernel+0x28/0x3c
but task is already holding lock:
(&type->s_umount_key#24/1){+.+.+.}, at: [<00000000004b88a0>] sget+0x228/0x36c
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #1 (&type->s_umount_key#24/1){+.+.+.}:
[<00000000004776d0>] lock_acquire+0x5c/0x74
[<0000000000469f5c>] down_write_nested+0x38/0x50
[<00000000004b88a0>] sget+0x228/0x36c
[<00000000005688fc>] nfs_get_sb+0x80c/0xa7c
[<00000000004b7ec8>] vfs_kern_mount+0x44/0xa4
[<00000000004b7f84>] do_kern_mount+0x30/0xcc
[<00000000004cf300>] do_mount+0x7c8/0x80c
[<00000000004ed2a4>] compat_sys_mount+0x224/0x274
[<0000000000406154>] linux_sparc_syscall32+0x34/0x40
-> #0 (kernel_mutex){+.+.+.}:
[<00000000004776d0>] lock_acquire+0x5c/0x74
[<00000000006f0ebc>] mutex_lock_nested+0x48/0x380
[<00000000006f32dc>] lock_kernel+0x28/0x3c
[<00000000006d20ec>] rpc_wait_bit_killable+0x64/0x8c
[<00000000006f0620>] __wait_on_bit+0x64/0xc0
[<00000000006f06e4>] out_of_line_wait_on_bit+0x68/0x7c
[<00000000006d2938>] __rpc_execute+0x150/0x2b4
[<00000000006d2ac0>] rpc_execute+0x24/0x34
[<00000000006cc338>] rpc_run_task+0x64/0x74
[<00000000006cc474>] rpc_call_sync+0x58/0x7c
[<00000000005717b0>] nfs3_rpc_wrapper+0x24/0xa0
[<0000000000572024>] do_proc_get_root+0x6c/0x10c
[<00000000005720dc>] nfs3_proc_get_root+0x18/0x5c
[<000000000056401c>] nfs_get_root+0x34/0x17c
[<0000000000568adc>] nfs_get_sb+0x9ec/0xa7c
[<00000000004b7ec8>] vfs_kern_mount+0x44/0xa4
[<00000000004b7f84>] do_kern_mount+0x30/0xcc
[<00000000004cf300>] do_mount+0x7c8/0x80c
[<00000000004ed2a4>] compat_sys_mount+0x224/0x274
[<0000000000406154>] linux_sparc_syscall32+0x34/0x40
other info that might help us debug this:
1 lock held by mount.nfs/1740:
#0: (&type->s_umount_key#24/1){+.+.+.}, at: [<00000000004b88a0>]
sget+0x228/0x36c
stack backtrace:
Call Trace:
[00000000004755ac] print_circular_bug_tail+0xfc/0x10c
[0000000000476e24] __lock_acquire+0x12f0/0x1b40
[00000000004776d0] lock_acquire+0x5c/0x74
[00000000006f0ebc] mutex_lock_nested+0x48/0x380
[00000000006f32dc] lock_kernel+0x28/0x3c
[00000000006d20ec] rpc_wait_bit_killable+0x64/0x8c
[00000000006f0620] __wait_on_bit+0x64/0xc0
[00000000006f06e4] out_of_line_wait_on_bit+0x68/0x7c
[00000000006d2938] __rpc_execute+0x150/0x2b4
[00000000006d2ac0] rpc_execute+0x24/0x34
[00000000006cc338] rpc_run_task+0x64/0x74
[00000000006cc474] rpc_call_sync+0x58/0x7c
[00000000005717b0] nfs3_rpc_wrapper+0x24/0xa0
[0000000000572024] do_proc_get_root+0x6c/0x10c
[00000000005720dc] nfs3_proc_get_root+0x18/0x5c
[000000000056401c] nfs_get_root+0x34/0x17c
device: '0:19': device_add
----- End forwarded message -----
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-15 23:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-14 3:34 [PATCH 0/3] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: reiserfs fixes Frederic Weisbecker
2009-04-14 3:34 ` [PATCH 1/3] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: provide a tool to lock only once the write lock Frederic Weisbecker
2009-04-14 3:34 ` [PATCH 2/3] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: lock only once in reiserfs_truncate_file Frederic Weisbecker
2009-04-14 3:34 ` [PATCH 3/3] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: only acquire the write lock once in reiserfs_dirty_inode Frederic Weisbecker
2009-04-14 4:51 ` [PATCH 0/3] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: reiserfs fixes Alexander Beregalov
2009-04-14 9:01 ` [tree] latest kill-the-BKL tree, v12 Ingo Molnar
2009-04-14 10:02 ` Edward Shishkin
2009-04-14 21:32 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-04-14 21:27 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-04-15 22:58 ` Alexander Beregalov
2009-04-15 22:58 ` Alexander Beregalov
2009-04-15 23:07 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-04-15 23:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-15 23:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-15 23:13 ` Trond Myklebust
2009-04-15 23:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-04-15 23:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-04-15 23:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-04-16 8:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-16 8:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-16 8:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-16 14:35 ` Alessio Igor Bogani
2009-04-16 14:35 ` Alessio Igor Bogani
2009-04-16 14:35 ` Alessio Igor Bogani
2009-04-16 16:40 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-04-16 16:40 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-04-14 10:00 ` [PATCH 0/3] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: reiserfs fixes Ingo Molnar
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=20090415230736.GA22710@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=a.beregalov@gmail.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=abogani@texware.it \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jeffm@suse.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=reiserfs-devel@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.