All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
	Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: 2.6.33-mmotm0304 - lockdep warning in ACPI code
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 13:36:58 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100318133658.80a15736.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5057.1268124370@localhost>

On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 03:46:10 -0500
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:

> Seen in my dmesg.  Appears to have started in 2.6.33-rc7-mmotm0210, I can't
> remember if I reported it before or not...
> 
> [    0.212297] ACPI: Using IOAPIC for interrupt routing
> [    0.340075] 
> [    0.340076] =============================================
> [    0.340241] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> [    0.340330] 2.6.33-mmotm0304 #5
> [    0.340415] ---------------------------------------------
> [    0.340504] swapper/1 is trying to acquire lock:
> [    0.340591]  (&dev->mutex){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff812fddfd>] __driver_attach+0x47/0x80
> [    0.340926] 
> [    0.340927] but task is already holding lock:
> [    0.340999]  (&dev->mutex){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff812fddef>] __driver_attach+0x39/0x80
> [    0.340999] 
> [    0.340999] other info that might help us debug this:
> [    0.340999] 1 lock held by swapper/1:
> [    0.340999]  #0:  (&dev->mutex){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff812fddef>] __driver_attach+0x39/0x80
> [    0.340999] 
> [    0.340999] stack backtrace:
> [    0.340999] Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.33-mmotm0304 #5
> [    0.340999] Call Trace:
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff810645e7>] __lock_acquire+0xc74/0xceb
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff81062a4f>] ? mark_lock+0x2d/0x22c
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff812fddfd>] ? __driver_attach+0x47/0x80
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff81064753>] lock_acquire+0xf5/0x112
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff812fddfd>] ? __driver_attach+0x47/0x80
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff81062ca0>] ? mark_held_locks+0x52/0x70
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff81581bb5>] __mutex_lock_common+0x5c/0x5aa
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff812fddfd>] ? __driver_attach+0x47/0x80
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff81571004>] ? klist_next+0x24/0xd7
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff812fddfd>] ? __driver_attach+0x47/0x80
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff812fddb6>] ? __driver_attach+0x0/0x80
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff815821a9>] mutex_lock_nested+0x34/0x39
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff812fddfd>] __driver_attach+0x47/0x80
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff812fddb6>] ? __driver_attach+0x0/0x80
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff812fddb6>] ? __driver_attach+0x0/0x80
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff812fd31f>] bus_for_each_dev+0x54/0x89
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff812fdb66>] driver_attach+0x19/0x1b
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff812fd7b1>] bus_add_driver+0xb4/0x203
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff812fe10f>] driver_register+0xb8/0x129
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff8123af12>] acpi_bus_register_driver+0x3e/0x40
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff81b4aaa4>] acpi_ec_init+0x37/0x55
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff81b4a920>] acpi_init+0x101/0x116
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff81b4a81f>] ? acpi_init+0x0/0x116
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff810001ef>] do_one_initcall+0x59/0x14e
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff81b2c687>] kernel_init+0x14d/0x1d7
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff810033d4>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff81584040>] ? restore_args+0x0/0x30
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff81b2c53a>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x1d7
> [    0.340999]  [<ffffffff810033d0>] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x0/0x10
> [    0.341046] ACPI: EC: GPE = 0x11, I/O: command/status = 0x934, data = 0x930
> 

<looks at mainline's 8e9394ce2412254ec69fd2a4f3e44a66eade2297>

    In the future, we are going to be changing the lock type for struct
    device (once we get the lockdep infrastructure properly worked out)

<looks at linux-next's "drivers/base: Convert dev->sem to mutex">

Seems that the latter patch (from Greg and Thomas) went and did the
mutex conversion before "we got the lockdep infrastructure properly
worked out".


  reply	other threads:[~2010-03-18 20:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-03-09  8:46 2.6.33-mmotm0304 - lockdep warning in ACPI code Valdis.Kletnieks
2010-03-18 20:36 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2010-03-18 20:42   ` Greg KH

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=20100318133658.80a15736.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
    --cc=greg@kroah.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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.