From: "Sachin P. Sant" <sachinp@in.ibm.com>
To: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: TKLEIN@de.ibm.com, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Jan-Bernd Themann <THEMANN@de.ibm.com>
Subject: [Powerpc / eHEA] Circular dependency with 2.6.29-rc6
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 14:17:12 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49A26290.60607@in.ibm.com> (raw)
While booting 2.6.29-rc6 on a powerpc box came across this
circular dependency with eHEA driver.
=======================================================
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
2.6.29-rc6 #2
-------------------------------------------------------
ip/2174 is trying to acquire lock:
(&ehea_fw_handles.lock){--..}, at: [<d000000002a13e30>] .ehea_up+0x64/0x6e0
[ehea]
but task is already holding lock:
(&port->port_lock){--..}, at: [<d000000002a1533c>] .ehea_open+0x3c/0xc4 [ehea]
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #2 (&port->port_lock){--..}:
[<c0000000000a8590>] .__lock_acquire+0x7e0/0x8a8
[<c0000000000a86ac>] .lock_acquire+0x54/0x80
[<c0000000005d7564>] .mutex_lock_nested+0x190/0x46c
[<d000000002a1533c>] .ehea_open+0x3c/0xc4 [ehea]
[<c000000000537834>] .dev_open+0xf4/0x168
[<c000000000535780>] .dev_change_flags+0xe4/0x1e8
[<c000000000597bfc>] .devinet_ioctl+0x2c4/0x750
[<c0000000005997a8>] .inet_ioctl+0xcc/0x11c
[<c000000000523400>] .sock_ioctl+0x2f0/0x34c
[<c0000000001380ec>] .vfs_ioctl+0x5c/0xf0
[<c000000000138810>] .do_vfs_ioctl+0x690/0x70c
[<c000000000138900>] .SyS_ioctl+0x74/0xb8
[<c00000000016fb08>] .dev_ifsioc+0x210/0x4b8
[<c00000000016ef18>] .compat_sys_ioctl+0x3f4/0x488
[<c00000000000855c>] syscall_exit+0x0/0x40
-> #1 (rtnl_mutex){--..}:
[<c0000000000a8590>] .__lock_acquire+0x7e0/0x8a8
[<c0000000000a86ac>] .lock_acquire+0x54/0x80
[<c0000000005d7564>] .mutex_lock_nested+0x190/0x46c
[<c0000000005430a8>] .rtnl_lock+0x20/0x38
[<c00000000053677c>] .register_netdev+0x1c/0x80
[<d000000002a12714>] .ehea_setup_single_port+0x2c8/0x3d0 [ehea]
[<d000000002a19da8>] .ehea_probe_adapter+0x288/0x394 [ehea]
[<c00000000051f034>] .of_platform_device_probe+0x78/0x86c
[<c00000000047faec>] .driver_probe_device+0x13c/0x200
[<c00000000047fc44>] .__driver_attach+0x94/0xd8
[<c00000000047eab4>] .bus_for_each_dev+0x80/0xd8
[<c00000000047f850>] .driver_attach+0x28/0x40
[<c00000000047f23c>] .bus_add_driver+0xd4/0x284
[<c00000000047ff7c>] .driver_register+0xc4/0x198
[<c00000000051eeec>] .of_register_driver+0x4c/0x60
[<c000000000024da4>] .ibmebus_register_driver+0x30/0x4c
[<d000000002a1a090>] .ehea_module_init+0x1dc/0x234c [ehea]
[<c000000000009368>] .do_one_initcall+0x90/0x1b0
[<c0000000000b2f24>] .SyS_init_module+0xc8/0x220
[<c00000000000855c>] syscall_exit+0x0/0x40
-> #0 (&ehea_fw_handles.lock){--..}:
[<c0000000000a8590>] .__lock_acquire+0x7e0/0x8a8
[<c0000000000a86ac>] .lock_acquire+0x54/0x80
[<c0000000005d7564>] .mutex_lock_nested+0x190/0x46c
[<d000000002a13e30>] .ehea_up+0x64/0x6e0 [ehea]
[<d000000002a15364>] .ehea_open+0x64/0xc4 [ehea]
[<c000000000537834>] .dev_open+0xf4/0x168
[<c000000000535780>] .dev_change_flags+0xe4/0x1e8
[<c000000000597bfc>] .devinet_ioctl+0x2c4/0x750
[<c0000000005997a8>] .inet_ioctl+0xcc/0x11c
[<c000000000523400>] .sock_ioctl+0x2f0/0x34c
[<c0000000001380ec>] .vfs_ioctl+0x5c/0xf0
[<c000000000138810>] .do_vfs_ioctl+0x690/0x70c
[<c000000000138900>] .SyS_ioctl+0x74/0xb8
[<c00000000016fb08>] .dev_ifsioc+0x210/0x4b8
[<c00000000016ef18>] .compat_sys_ioctl+0x3f4/0x488
[<c00000000000855c>] syscall_exit+0x0/0x40
other info that might help us debug this:
2 locks held by ip/2174:
#0: (rtnl_mutex){--..}, at: [<c0000000005430a8>] .rtnl_lock+0x20/0x38
#1: (&port->port_lock){--..}, at: [<d000000002a1533c>] .ehea_open+0x3c/0xc4
[ehea]
stack backtrace:
Call Trace:
[c00000004246b070] [c00000000001154c] .show_stack+0x70/0x184 (unreliable)
[c00000004246b120] [c0000000000a6ee4] .print_circular_bug_tail+0xd8/0xfc
[c00000004246b1f0] [c0000000000a76ec] .validate_chain+0x7e4/0xea8
[c00000004246b2b0] [c0000000000a8590] .__lock_acquire+0x7e0/0x8a8
[c00000004246b3a0] [c0000000000a86ac] .lock_acquire+0x54/0x80
[c00000004246b430] [c0000000005d7564] .mutex_lock_nested+0x190/0x46c
[c00000004246b510] [d000000002a13e30] .ehea_up+0x64/0x6e0 [ehea]
[c00000004246b610] [d000000002a15364] .ehea_open+0x64/0xc4 [ehea]
[c00000004246b6b0] [c000000000537834] .dev_open+0xf4/0x168
[c00000004246b740] [c000000000535780] .dev_change_flags+0xe4/0x1e8
[c00000004246b7f0] [c000000000597bfc] .devinet_ioctl+0x2c4/0x750
[c00000004246b8f0] [c0000000005997a8] .inet_ioctl+0xcc/0x11c
[c00000004246b960] [c000000000523400] .sock_ioctl+0x2f0/0x34c
[c00000004246ba00] [c0000000001380ec] .vfs_ioctl+0x5c/0xf0
[c00000004246baa0] [c000000000138810] .do_vfs_ioctl+0x690/0x70c
[c00000004246bb80] [c000000000138900] .SyS_ioctl+0x74/0xb8
[c00000004246bc30] [c00000000016fb08] .dev_ifsioc+0x210/0x4b8
[c00000004246bd40] [c00000000016ef18] .compat_sys_ioctl+0x3f4/0x488
[c00000004246be30] [c00000000000855c] syscall_exit+0x0/0x40
ehea: eth2: Physical port up
Thanks
-Sachin
--
---------------------------------
Sachin Sant
IBM Linux Technology Center
India Systems and Technology Labs
Bangalore, India
---------------------------------
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Sachin P. Sant" <sachinp@in.ibm.com>
To: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: TKLEIN@de.ibm.com, Jan-Bernd Themann <THEMANN@de.ibm.com>,
Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [Powerpc / eHEA] Circular dependency with 2.6.29-rc6
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 14:17:12 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49A26290.60607@in.ibm.com> (raw)
While booting 2.6.29-rc6 on a powerpc box came across this
circular dependency with eHEA driver.
=======================================================
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
2.6.29-rc6 #2
-------------------------------------------------------
ip/2174 is trying to acquire lock:
(&ehea_fw_handles.lock){--..}, at: [<d000000002a13e30>] .ehea_up+0x64/0x6e0
[ehea]
but task is already holding lock:
(&port->port_lock){--..}, at: [<d000000002a1533c>] .ehea_open+0x3c/0xc4 [ehea]
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #2 (&port->port_lock){--..}:
[<c0000000000a8590>] .__lock_acquire+0x7e0/0x8a8
[<c0000000000a86ac>] .lock_acquire+0x54/0x80
[<c0000000005d7564>] .mutex_lock_nested+0x190/0x46c
[<d000000002a1533c>] .ehea_open+0x3c/0xc4 [ehea]
[<c000000000537834>] .dev_open+0xf4/0x168
[<c000000000535780>] .dev_change_flags+0xe4/0x1e8
[<c000000000597bfc>] .devinet_ioctl+0x2c4/0x750
[<c0000000005997a8>] .inet_ioctl+0xcc/0x11c
[<c000000000523400>] .sock_ioctl+0x2f0/0x34c
[<c0000000001380ec>] .vfs_ioctl+0x5c/0xf0
[<c000000000138810>] .do_vfs_ioctl+0x690/0x70c
[<c000000000138900>] .SyS_ioctl+0x74/0xb8
[<c00000000016fb08>] .dev_ifsioc+0x210/0x4b8
[<c00000000016ef18>] .compat_sys_ioctl+0x3f4/0x488
[<c00000000000855c>] syscall_exit+0x0/0x40
-> #1 (rtnl_mutex){--..}:
[<c0000000000a8590>] .__lock_acquire+0x7e0/0x8a8
[<c0000000000a86ac>] .lock_acquire+0x54/0x80
[<c0000000005d7564>] .mutex_lock_nested+0x190/0x46c
[<c0000000005430a8>] .rtnl_lock+0x20/0x38
[<c00000000053677c>] .register_netdev+0x1c/0x80
[<d000000002a12714>] .ehea_setup_single_port+0x2c8/0x3d0 [ehea]
[<d000000002a19da8>] .ehea_probe_adapter+0x288/0x394 [ehea]
[<c00000000051f034>] .of_platform_device_probe+0x78/0x86c
[<c00000000047faec>] .driver_probe_device+0x13c/0x200
[<c00000000047fc44>] .__driver_attach+0x94/0xd8
[<c00000000047eab4>] .bus_for_each_dev+0x80/0xd8
[<c00000000047f850>] .driver_attach+0x28/0x40
[<c00000000047f23c>] .bus_add_driver+0xd4/0x284
[<c00000000047ff7c>] .driver_register+0xc4/0x198
[<c00000000051eeec>] .of_register_driver+0x4c/0x60
[<c000000000024da4>] .ibmebus_register_driver+0x30/0x4c
[<d000000002a1a090>] .ehea_module_init+0x1dc/0x234c [ehea]
[<c000000000009368>] .do_one_initcall+0x90/0x1b0
[<c0000000000b2f24>] .SyS_init_module+0xc8/0x220
[<c00000000000855c>] syscall_exit+0x0/0x40
-> #0 (&ehea_fw_handles.lock){--..}:
[<c0000000000a8590>] .__lock_acquire+0x7e0/0x8a8
[<c0000000000a86ac>] .lock_acquire+0x54/0x80
[<c0000000005d7564>] .mutex_lock_nested+0x190/0x46c
[<d000000002a13e30>] .ehea_up+0x64/0x6e0 [ehea]
[<d000000002a15364>] .ehea_open+0x64/0xc4 [ehea]
[<c000000000537834>] .dev_open+0xf4/0x168
[<c000000000535780>] .dev_change_flags+0xe4/0x1e8
[<c000000000597bfc>] .devinet_ioctl+0x2c4/0x750
[<c0000000005997a8>] .inet_ioctl+0xcc/0x11c
[<c000000000523400>] .sock_ioctl+0x2f0/0x34c
[<c0000000001380ec>] .vfs_ioctl+0x5c/0xf0
[<c000000000138810>] .do_vfs_ioctl+0x690/0x70c
[<c000000000138900>] .SyS_ioctl+0x74/0xb8
[<c00000000016fb08>] .dev_ifsioc+0x210/0x4b8
[<c00000000016ef18>] .compat_sys_ioctl+0x3f4/0x488
[<c00000000000855c>] syscall_exit+0x0/0x40
other info that might help us debug this:
2 locks held by ip/2174:
#0: (rtnl_mutex){--..}, at: [<c0000000005430a8>] .rtnl_lock+0x20/0x38
#1: (&port->port_lock){--..}, at: [<d000000002a1533c>] .ehea_open+0x3c/0xc4
[ehea]
stack backtrace:
Call Trace:
[c00000004246b070] [c00000000001154c] .show_stack+0x70/0x184 (unreliable)
[c00000004246b120] [c0000000000a6ee4] .print_circular_bug_tail+0xd8/0xfc
[c00000004246b1f0] [c0000000000a76ec] .validate_chain+0x7e4/0xea8
[c00000004246b2b0] [c0000000000a8590] .__lock_acquire+0x7e0/0x8a8
[c00000004246b3a0] [c0000000000a86ac] .lock_acquire+0x54/0x80
[c00000004246b430] [c0000000005d7564] .mutex_lock_nested+0x190/0x46c
[c00000004246b510] [d000000002a13e30] .ehea_up+0x64/0x6e0 [ehea]
[c00000004246b610] [d000000002a15364] .ehea_open+0x64/0xc4 [ehea]
[c00000004246b6b0] [c000000000537834] .dev_open+0xf4/0x168
[c00000004246b740] [c000000000535780] .dev_change_flags+0xe4/0x1e8
[c00000004246b7f0] [c000000000597bfc] .devinet_ioctl+0x2c4/0x750
[c00000004246b8f0] [c0000000005997a8] .inet_ioctl+0xcc/0x11c
[c00000004246b960] [c000000000523400] .sock_ioctl+0x2f0/0x34c
[c00000004246ba00] [c0000000001380ec] .vfs_ioctl+0x5c/0xf0
[c00000004246baa0] [c000000000138810] .do_vfs_ioctl+0x690/0x70c
[c00000004246bb80] [c000000000138900] .SyS_ioctl+0x74/0xb8
[c00000004246bc30] [c00000000016fb08] .dev_ifsioc+0x210/0x4b8
[c00000004246bd40] [c00000000016ef18] .compat_sys_ioctl+0x3f4/0x488
[c00000004246be30] [c00000000000855c] syscall_exit+0x0/0x40
ehea: eth2: Physical port up
Thanks
-Sachin
--
---------------------------------
Sachin Sant
IBM Linux Technology Center
India Systems and Technology Labs
Bangalore, India
---------------------------------
next reply other threads:[~2009-02-23 8:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-23 8:47 Sachin P. Sant [this message]
2009-02-23 8:47 ` [Powerpc / eHEA] Circular dependency with 2.6.29-rc6 Sachin P. Sant
2009-02-25 15:05 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2009-02-25 15:05 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2009-02-25 15:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-25 17:07 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2009-02-25 18:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=49A26290.60607@in.ibm.com \
--to=sachinp@in.ibm.com \
--cc=THEMANN@de.ibm.com \
--cc=TKLEIN@de.ibm.com \
--cc=kamalesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=netdev@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.