All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@primarydata.com>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
	Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@netapp.com>,
	Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>
Subject: net/sunrpc: v4.14-rc4 lockdep warning
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 19:17:38 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171009181738.GA30680@red-moon> (raw)

Hi,

I have run into the lockdep warning below while running v4.14-rc3/rc4
on an ARM64 defconfig Juno dev board - reporting it to check whether
it is a known/genuine issue.

Please let me know if you need further debug data or need some
specific tests.

Thanks,
Lorenzo

[    6.209384] ======================================================
[    6.215569] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[    6.221755] 4.14.0-rc4 #54 Not tainted
[    6.225503] ------------------------------------------------------
[    6.231689] kworker/4:0H/32 is trying to acquire lock:
[    6.236830]  ((&task->u.tk_work)){+.+.}, at: [<ffff0000080e64cc>] process_one_work+0x1cc/0x3f0
[    6.245472] 
               but task is already holding lock:
[    6.251309]  ("xprtiod"){+.+.}, at: [<ffff0000080e64cc>] process_one_work+0x1cc/0x3f0
[    6.259158] 
               which lock already depends on the new lock.

[    6.267345] 
               the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[    6.274836] 
               -> #1 ("xprtiod"){+.+.}:
[    6.279903]        lock_acquire+0x6c/0xb8
[    6.283914]        flush_work+0x188/0x270
[    6.287926]        __cancel_work_timer+0x120/0x198
[    6.292720]        cancel_work_sync+0x10/0x18
[    6.297081]        xs_destroy+0x34/0x58
[    6.300917]        xprt_destroy+0x84/0x90
[    6.304927]        xprt_put+0x34/0x40
[    6.308589]        rpc_task_release_client+0x6c/0x80
[    6.313557]        rpc_release_resources_task+0x2c/0x38
[    6.318786]        __rpc_execute+0x9c/0x210
[    6.322971]        rpc_async_schedule+0x10/0x18
[    6.327504]        process_one_work+0x240/0x3f0
[    6.332036]        worker_thread+0x48/0x420
[    6.336222]        kthread+0x12c/0x158
[    6.339972]        ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18
[    6.344068] 
               -> #0 ((&task->u.tk_work)){+.+.}:
[    6.349920]        __lock_acquire+0x12ec/0x14a8
[    6.354451]        lock_acquire+0x6c/0xb8
[    6.358462]        process_one_work+0x22c/0x3f0
[    6.362994]        worker_thread+0x48/0x420
[    6.367180]        kthread+0x12c/0x158
[    6.370929]        ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18
[    6.375025] 
               other info that might help us debug this:

[    6.383038]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:

[    6.388962]        CPU0                    CPU1
[    6.393493]        ----                    ----
[    6.398023]   lock("xprtiod");
[    6.401080]                                lock((&task->u.tk_work));
[    6.407444]                                lock("xprtiod");
[    6.413024]   lock((&task->u.tk_work));
[    6.416863] 
                *** DEADLOCK ***

[    6.422789] 1 lock held by kworker/4:0H/32:
[    6.426972]  #0:  ("xprtiod"){+.+.}, at: [<ffff0000080e64cc>] process_one_work+0x1cc/0x3f0
[    6.435258] 
               stack backtrace:
[    6.439618] CPU: 4 PID: 32 Comm: kworker/4:0H Not tainted 4.14.0-rc4 #54
[    6.446325] Hardware name: ARM Juno development board (r2) (DT)
[    6.452252] Workqueue: xprtiod rpc_async_schedule
[    6.456959] Call trace:
[    6.459406] [<ffff000008089430>] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x3c8
[    6.464810] [<ffff00000808980c>] show_stack+0x14/0x20
[    6.469866] [<ffff000008a01a30>] dump_stack+0xb8/0xf0
[    6.474922] [<ffff0000081194ac>] print_circular_bug+0x224/0x3a0
[    6.480849] [<ffff00000811a304>] check_prev_add+0x304/0x860
[    6.486426] [<ffff00000811c8c4>] __lock_acquire+0x12ec/0x14a8
[    6.492177] [<ffff00000811d144>] lock_acquire+0x6c/0xb8
[    6.497406] [<ffff0000080e652c>] process_one_work+0x22c/0x3f0
[    6.503156] [<ffff0000080e6738>] worker_thread+0x48/0x420
[    6.508560] [<ffff0000080ed5bc>] kthread+0x12c/0x158
[    6.513528] [<ffff000008084d48>] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18

             reply	other threads:[~2017-10-09 18:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-10-09 18:17 Lorenzo Pieralisi [this message]
2017-10-09 18:32 ` net/sunrpc: v4.14-rc4 lockdep warning Trond Myklebust
2017-10-09 18:32   ` Trond Myklebust
2017-10-10 14:03   ` tj
2017-10-10 16:48     ` Trond Myklebust
2017-10-10 16:48       ` Trond Myklebust
2017-10-10 17:19       ` tj
2017-10-11 17:49         ` Trond Myklebust
2017-10-11 17:49           ` Trond Myklebust
2017-10-16 13:34           ` Jan Glauber

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=20171009181738.GA30680@red-moon \
    --to=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=anna.schumaker@netapp.com \
    --cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=jlayton@poochiereds.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=trond.myklebust@primarydata.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.