From: peter.chen@freescale.com (Peter Chen)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: v3.9-rc1: swapper/0 [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 16:08:44 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130307080843.GG20470@nchen-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51371B5E.1000508@free-electrons.com>
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 11:33:02AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just noticed this in 3.9-rc1 on an iMX28 (ARM) board with a config
> based on mxs_defconfig. I'm using the patchset "Add tested id switch
> and vbus connect detect support for Chipidea" from Peter Chen in its
> 10th version [1], rebased on top of 3.9-rc1, but since this doesn't
> modify the locks present in the udc_irq function, I think the problem
> is elsewhere.
>
> Please let me know if you have any questions,
> Thanks,
> Maxime
>
> [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2013-February/151837.html
>
>
> [ 1.893905] ======================================================
> [ 1.900097] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> [ 1.906381] 3.9.0-rc1-00024-g39231ac #475 Not tainted
> [ 1.911441] -------------------------------------------------------
> [ 1.917716] swapper/0 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 1.922341] (&(&ci->lock)->rlock){-.....}, at: [<c02580fc>] ep_enable+0x20/0x25c
> [ 1.929935]
> [ 1.929935] but task is already holding lock:
> [ 1.935782] (&(&cdev->lock)->rlock){-.....}, at: [<c025e46c>] composite_setup+0x384/0xee8
> [ 1.944124]
> [ 1.944124] which lock already depends on the new lock.
> [ 1.944124]
> [ 1.952319]
> [ 1.952319] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> [ 1.959813]
> -> #1 (&(&cdev->lock)->rlock){-.....}:
> [ 1.964829] [<c005adb0>] lock_acquire+0x98/0x104
> [ 1.970106] [<c0375c28>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3c/0x50
> [ 1.976152] [<c025d960>] composite_disconnect+0x1c/0x5c
> [ 1.982016] [<c02591c0>] udc_irq+0x6d8/0xbe8
> [ 1.986930] [<c02571fc>] ci_irq+0x9c/0x108
> [ 1.991667] [<c0067214>] handle_irq_event_percpu+0x5c/0x268
> [ 1.997896] [<c006745c>] handle_irq_event+0x3c/0x5c
> [ 2.003417] [<c00696c0>] handle_level_irq+0x8c/0xe8
> [ 2.008933] [<c0066af4>] generic_handle_irq+0x20/0x30
> [ 2.014627] [<c000fb8c>] handle_IRQ+0x30/0x84
> [ 2.019633] [<c00086f0>] icoll_handle_irq+0x30/0x44
> [ 2.025148] [<c000e8e4>] __irq_svc+0x44/0x54
> [ 2.030058] [<c000fd58>] cpu_idle+0x60/0xec
> [ 2.034884] [<c04e970c>] start_kernel+0x260/0x2a0
> [ 2.040237] [<40008040>] 0x40008040
> [ 2.044364]
> -> #0 (&(&ci->lock)->rlock){-.....}:
> [ 2.049210] [<c005a284>] __lock_acquire+0x14e8/0x1b18
> [ 2.054906] [<c005adb0>] lock_acquire+0x98/0x104
> [ 2.060164] [<c0375c28>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3c/0x50
> [ 2.066202] [<c02580fc>] ep_enable+0x20/0x25c
> [ 2.071207] [<c02629d0>] gether_connect+0x34/0x1c0
> [ 2.076643] [<c0262db0>] eem_set_alt+0x70/0xcc
> [ 2.081723] [<c025eb54>] composite_setup+0xa6c/0xee8
> [ 2.087325] [<c0259244>] udc_irq+0x75c/0xbe8
> [ 2.092237] [<c02571fc>] ci_irq+0x9c/0x108
> [ 2.096973] [<c0067214>] handle_irq_event_percpu+0x5c/0x268
> [ 2.103194] [<c006745c>] handle_irq_event+0x3c/0x5c
> [ 2.108717] [<c00696c0>] handle_level_irq+0x8c/0xe8
> [ 2.114234] [<c0066af4>] generic_handle_irq+0x20/0x30
> [ 2.119926] [<c000fb8c>] handle_IRQ+0x30/0x84
> [ 2.124929] [<c00086f0>] icoll_handle_irq+0x30/0x44
> [ 2.130445] [<c000e8e4>] __irq_svc+0x44/0x54
> [ 2.135353] [<c000fd58>] cpu_idle+0x60/0xec
> [ 2.140176] [<c04e970c>] start_kernel+0x260/0x2a0
> [ 2.145521] [<40008040>] 0x40008040
> [ 2.149645]
> [ 2.149645] other info that might help us debug this:
> [ 2.149645]
> [ 2.157667] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> [ 2.157667]
> [ 2.163598] CPU0 CPU1
> [ 2.168134] ---- ----
> [ 2.172667] lock(&(&cdev->lock)->rlock);
> [ 2.176790] lock(&(&ci->lock)->rlock);
> [ 2.183255] lock(&(&cdev->lock)->rlock);
> [ 2.189893] lock(&(&ci->lock)->rlock);
The precondition of above is the chipidea interrupt can be re-entered.
But as far as I know, the same interrupt can't be re-entered at current
system.
> [ 2.193842]
> [ 2.193842] *** DEADLOCK ***
> [ 2.193842]
> [ 2.199782] 1 lock held by swapper/0:
> [ 2.203451] #0: (&(&cdev->lock)->rlock){-.....}, at: [<c025e46c>] composite_setup+0x384/0xee8
> [ 2.212231]
> [ 2.212231] stack backtrace:
> [ 2.216663] [<c0014120>] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0xf0) from [<c0370078>] (print_circular_bug+0x25c/0x2a8)
> [ 2.226112] [<c0370078>] (print_circular_bug+0x25c/0x2a8) from [<c005a284>] (__lock_acquire+0x14e8/0x1b18)
> [ 2.235813] [<c005a284>] (__lock_acquire+0x14e8/0x1b18) from [<c005adb0>] (lock_acquire+0x98/0x104)
> [ 2.244904] [<c005adb0>] (lock_acquire+0x98/0x104) from [<c0375c28>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3c/0x50)
> [ 2.254347] [<c0375c28>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3c/0x50) from [<c02580fc>] (ep_enable+0x20/0x25c)
> [ 2.263527] [<c02580fc>] (ep_enable+0x20/0x25c) from [<c02629d0>] (gether_connect+0x34/0x1c0)
> [ 2.272094] [<c02629d0>] (gether_connect+0x34/0x1c0) from [<c0262db0>] (eem_set_alt+0x70/0xcc)
> [ 2.280744] [<c0262db0>] (eem_set_alt+0x70/0xcc) from [<c025eb54>] (composite_setup+0xa6c/0xee8)
> [ 2.289572] [<c025eb54>] (composite_setup+0xa6c/0xee8) from [<c0259244>] (udc_irq+0x75c/0xbe8)
> [ 2.298226] [<c0259244>] (udc_irq+0x75c/0xbe8) from [<c02571fc>] (ci_irq+0x9c/0x108)
> [ 2.306026] [<c02571fc>] (ci_irq+0x9c/0x108) from [<c0067214>] (handle_irq_event_percpu+0x5c/0x268)
> [ 2.315119] [<c0067214>] (handle_irq_event_percpu+0x5c/0x268) from [<c006745c>] (handle_irq_event+0x3c/0x5c)
> [ 2.324986] [<c006745c>] (handle_irq_event+0x3c/0x5c) from [<c00696c0>] (handle_level_irq+0x8c/0xe8)
> [ 2.334159] [<c00696c0>] (handle_level_irq+0x8c/0xe8) from [<c0066af4>] (generic_handle_irq+0x20/0x30)
> [ 2.343516] [<c0066af4>] (generic_handle_irq+0x20/0x30) from [<c000fb8c>] (handle_IRQ+0x30/0x84)
> [ 2.352342] [<c000fb8c>] (handle_IRQ+0x30/0x84) from [<c00086f0>] (icoll_handle_irq+0x30/0x44)
> [ 2.360991] [<c00086f0>] (icoll_handle_irq+0x30/0x44) from [<c000e8e4>] (__irq_svc+0x44/0x54)
> [ 2.369531] Exception stack(0xc050df68 to 0xc050dfb0)
> [ 2.374612] df60: 00000001 00000001 00000000 20000013 c050c000 c05476e8
> [ 2.382819] df80: c050c000 c050c000 c05476e8 41069265 40504270 00000000 600000d3 c050dfb0
> [ 2.391015] dfa0: c005b708 c000fd58 20000013 ffffffff
> [ 2.396110] [<c000e8e4>] (__irq_svc+0x44/0x54) from [<c000fd58>] (cpu_idle+0x60/0xec)
> [ 2.403990] [<c000fd58>] (cpu_idle+0x60/0xec) from [<c04e970c>] (start_kernel+0x260/0x2a0)
> [ 2.412291] [<c04e970c>] (start_kernel+0x260/0x2a0) from [<40008040>] (0x40008040)
>
> --
> Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
> Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
> development, consulting, training and support.
> http://free-electrons.com
>
--
Best Regards,
Peter Chen
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Chen <peter.chen@freescale.com>
To: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: v3.9-rc1: swapper/0 [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 16:08:44 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130307080843.GG20470@nchen-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51371B5E.1000508@free-electrons.com>
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 11:33:02AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just noticed this in 3.9-rc1 on an iMX28 (ARM) board with a config
> based on mxs_defconfig. I'm using the patchset "Add tested id switch
> and vbus connect detect support for Chipidea" from Peter Chen in its
> 10th version [1], rebased on top of 3.9-rc1, but since this doesn't
> modify the locks present in the udc_irq function, I think the problem
> is elsewhere.
>
> Please let me know if you have any questions,
> Thanks,
> Maxime
>
> [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2013-February/151837.html
>
>
> [ 1.893905] ======================================================
> [ 1.900097] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> [ 1.906381] 3.9.0-rc1-00024-g39231ac #475 Not tainted
> [ 1.911441] -------------------------------------------------------
> [ 1.917716] swapper/0 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 1.922341] (&(&ci->lock)->rlock){-.....}, at: [<c02580fc>] ep_enable+0x20/0x25c
> [ 1.929935]
> [ 1.929935] but task is already holding lock:
> [ 1.935782] (&(&cdev->lock)->rlock){-.....}, at: [<c025e46c>] composite_setup+0x384/0xee8
> [ 1.944124]
> [ 1.944124] which lock already depends on the new lock.
> [ 1.944124]
> [ 1.952319]
> [ 1.952319] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> [ 1.959813]
> -> #1 (&(&cdev->lock)->rlock){-.....}:
> [ 1.964829] [<c005adb0>] lock_acquire+0x98/0x104
> [ 1.970106] [<c0375c28>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3c/0x50
> [ 1.976152] [<c025d960>] composite_disconnect+0x1c/0x5c
> [ 1.982016] [<c02591c0>] udc_irq+0x6d8/0xbe8
> [ 1.986930] [<c02571fc>] ci_irq+0x9c/0x108
> [ 1.991667] [<c0067214>] handle_irq_event_percpu+0x5c/0x268
> [ 1.997896] [<c006745c>] handle_irq_event+0x3c/0x5c
> [ 2.003417] [<c00696c0>] handle_level_irq+0x8c/0xe8
> [ 2.008933] [<c0066af4>] generic_handle_irq+0x20/0x30
> [ 2.014627] [<c000fb8c>] handle_IRQ+0x30/0x84
> [ 2.019633] [<c00086f0>] icoll_handle_irq+0x30/0x44
> [ 2.025148] [<c000e8e4>] __irq_svc+0x44/0x54
> [ 2.030058] [<c000fd58>] cpu_idle+0x60/0xec
> [ 2.034884] [<c04e970c>] start_kernel+0x260/0x2a0
> [ 2.040237] [<40008040>] 0x40008040
> [ 2.044364]
> -> #0 (&(&ci->lock)->rlock){-.....}:
> [ 2.049210] [<c005a284>] __lock_acquire+0x14e8/0x1b18
> [ 2.054906] [<c005adb0>] lock_acquire+0x98/0x104
> [ 2.060164] [<c0375c28>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3c/0x50
> [ 2.066202] [<c02580fc>] ep_enable+0x20/0x25c
> [ 2.071207] [<c02629d0>] gether_connect+0x34/0x1c0
> [ 2.076643] [<c0262db0>] eem_set_alt+0x70/0xcc
> [ 2.081723] [<c025eb54>] composite_setup+0xa6c/0xee8
> [ 2.087325] [<c0259244>] udc_irq+0x75c/0xbe8
> [ 2.092237] [<c02571fc>] ci_irq+0x9c/0x108
> [ 2.096973] [<c0067214>] handle_irq_event_percpu+0x5c/0x268
> [ 2.103194] [<c006745c>] handle_irq_event+0x3c/0x5c
> [ 2.108717] [<c00696c0>] handle_level_irq+0x8c/0xe8
> [ 2.114234] [<c0066af4>] generic_handle_irq+0x20/0x30
> [ 2.119926] [<c000fb8c>] handle_IRQ+0x30/0x84
> [ 2.124929] [<c00086f0>] icoll_handle_irq+0x30/0x44
> [ 2.130445] [<c000e8e4>] __irq_svc+0x44/0x54
> [ 2.135353] [<c000fd58>] cpu_idle+0x60/0xec
> [ 2.140176] [<c04e970c>] start_kernel+0x260/0x2a0
> [ 2.145521] [<40008040>] 0x40008040
> [ 2.149645]
> [ 2.149645] other info that might help us debug this:
> [ 2.149645]
> [ 2.157667] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> [ 2.157667]
> [ 2.163598] CPU0 CPU1
> [ 2.168134] ---- ----
> [ 2.172667] lock(&(&cdev->lock)->rlock);
> [ 2.176790] lock(&(&ci->lock)->rlock);
> [ 2.183255] lock(&(&cdev->lock)->rlock);
> [ 2.189893] lock(&(&ci->lock)->rlock);
The precondition of above is the chipidea interrupt can be re-entered.
But as far as I know, the same interrupt can't be re-entered at current
system.
> [ 2.193842]
> [ 2.193842] *** DEADLOCK ***
> [ 2.193842]
> [ 2.199782] 1 lock held by swapper/0:
> [ 2.203451] #0: (&(&cdev->lock)->rlock){-.....}, at: [<c025e46c>] composite_setup+0x384/0xee8
> [ 2.212231]
> [ 2.212231] stack backtrace:
> [ 2.216663] [<c0014120>] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0xf0) from [<c0370078>] (print_circular_bug+0x25c/0x2a8)
> [ 2.226112] [<c0370078>] (print_circular_bug+0x25c/0x2a8) from [<c005a284>] (__lock_acquire+0x14e8/0x1b18)
> [ 2.235813] [<c005a284>] (__lock_acquire+0x14e8/0x1b18) from [<c005adb0>] (lock_acquire+0x98/0x104)
> [ 2.244904] [<c005adb0>] (lock_acquire+0x98/0x104) from [<c0375c28>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3c/0x50)
> [ 2.254347] [<c0375c28>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3c/0x50) from [<c02580fc>] (ep_enable+0x20/0x25c)
> [ 2.263527] [<c02580fc>] (ep_enable+0x20/0x25c) from [<c02629d0>] (gether_connect+0x34/0x1c0)
> [ 2.272094] [<c02629d0>] (gether_connect+0x34/0x1c0) from [<c0262db0>] (eem_set_alt+0x70/0xcc)
> [ 2.280744] [<c0262db0>] (eem_set_alt+0x70/0xcc) from [<c025eb54>] (composite_setup+0xa6c/0xee8)
> [ 2.289572] [<c025eb54>] (composite_setup+0xa6c/0xee8) from [<c0259244>] (udc_irq+0x75c/0xbe8)
> [ 2.298226] [<c0259244>] (udc_irq+0x75c/0xbe8) from [<c02571fc>] (ci_irq+0x9c/0x108)
> [ 2.306026] [<c02571fc>] (ci_irq+0x9c/0x108) from [<c0067214>] (handle_irq_event_percpu+0x5c/0x268)
> [ 2.315119] [<c0067214>] (handle_irq_event_percpu+0x5c/0x268) from [<c006745c>] (handle_irq_event+0x3c/0x5c)
> [ 2.324986] [<c006745c>] (handle_irq_event+0x3c/0x5c) from [<c00696c0>] (handle_level_irq+0x8c/0xe8)
> [ 2.334159] [<c00696c0>] (handle_level_irq+0x8c/0xe8) from [<c0066af4>] (generic_handle_irq+0x20/0x30)
> [ 2.343516] [<c0066af4>] (generic_handle_irq+0x20/0x30) from [<c000fb8c>] (handle_IRQ+0x30/0x84)
> [ 2.352342] [<c000fb8c>] (handle_IRQ+0x30/0x84) from [<c00086f0>] (icoll_handle_irq+0x30/0x44)
> [ 2.360991] [<c00086f0>] (icoll_handle_irq+0x30/0x44) from [<c000e8e4>] (__irq_svc+0x44/0x54)
> [ 2.369531] Exception stack(0xc050df68 to 0xc050dfb0)
> [ 2.374612] df60: 00000001 00000001 00000000 20000013 c050c000 c05476e8
> [ 2.382819] df80: c050c000 c050c000 c05476e8 41069265 40504270 00000000 600000d3 c050dfb0
> [ 2.391015] dfa0: c005b708 c000fd58 20000013 ffffffff
> [ 2.396110] [<c000e8e4>] (__irq_svc+0x44/0x54) from [<c000fd58>] (cpu_idle+0x60/0xec)
> [ 2.403990] [<c000fd58>] (cpu_idle+0x60/0xec) from [<c04e970c>] (start_kernel+0x260/0x2a0)
> [ 2.412291] [<c04e970c>] (start_kernel+0x260/0x2a0) from [<40008040>] (0x40008040)
>
> --
> Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
> Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
> development, consulting, training and support.
> http://free-electrons.com
>
--
Best Regards,
Peter Chen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-07 8:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-06 10:33 v3.9-rc1: swapper/0 [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ] Maxime Ripard
2013-03-06 10:33 ` Maxime Ripard
2013-03-06 13:43 ` Alexander Shishkin
2013-03-06 13:43 ` Alexander Shishkin
2013-03-06 14:11 ` Maxime Ripard
2013-03-06 14:11 ` Maxime Ripard
2013-03-07 8:08 ` Peter Chen [this message]
2013-03-07 8:08 ` Peter Chen
2013-03-07 10:24 ` Maxime Ripard
2013-03-07 10:24 ` Maxime Ripard
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=20130307080843.GG20470@nchen-desktop \
--to=peter.chen@freescale.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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.