* What does inconsistent lock state mean?
@ 2011-12-07 23:19 Kai Meyer
2011-12-08 14:47 ` Srivatsa Bhat
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Kai Meyer @ 2011-12-07 23:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kernelnewbies
I'm getting this when I try to spin_unlock a recently acquired lock with
spin_lock. IRQs are still somewhat of a mystery to me, and cryptic lock
state symbols (IN-HARDIRQ-W, HARDIRQ-ON-W) are unintelligible to me.
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: =================================
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: 2.6.32-220.el6.x86_64.debug #1
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: ---------------------------------
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: inconsistent {IN-HARDIRQ-W} ->
{HARDIRQ-ON-W} usage.
Looking at lockdep.c isn't giving me any help either. It's obfuscated
beyond my ability to grok by simply reading the code.
It seems like this portion should help me, but it doesn't....
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: {IN-HARDIRQ-W} state was registered at:
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810afbca>]
__lock_acquire+0x77a/0x1570
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810b0a64>] lock_acquire+0xa4/0x120
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81520c75>]
_spin_lock_irqsave+0x55/0xa0
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa006b19b>] blk_done+0x2b/0x110
[virtio_blk]
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa00401dc>]
vring_interrupt+0x3c/0xd0 [virtio_ring]
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810ec080>]
handle_IRQ_event+0x50/0x160
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810ee840>]
handle_edge_irq+0xe0/0x170
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff8100e059>] handle_irq+0x49/0xa0
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81526cdc>] do_IRQ+0x6c/0xf0
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff8100ba93>] ret_from_intr+0x0/0x16
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810148e2>] default_idle+0x52/0xc0
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81009e0b>] cpu_idle+0xbb/0x110
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81516623>]
start_secondary+0x211/0x254
Then later it tells me that I'm holding 1 lock, which is the one that I
mentioned at the beginning that was just recently locked.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* What does inconsistent lock state mean?
2011-12-07 23:19 What does inconsistent lock state mean? Kai Meyer
@ 2011-12-08 14:47 ` Srivatsa Bhat
2011-12-08 18:20 ` Kai Meyer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Srivatsa Bhat @ 2011-12-08 14:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kernelnewbies
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 4:49 AM, Kai Meyer <kai@gnukai.com> wrote:
> I'm getting this when I try to spin_unlock a recently acquired lock with
> spin_lock. IRQs are still somewhat of a mystery to me, and cryptic lock
> state symbols (IN-HARDIRQ-W, HARDIRQ-ON-W) are unintelligible to me.
>
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: =================================
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: 2.6.32-220.el6.x86_64.debug #1
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: ---------------------------------
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: inconsistent {IN-HARDIRQ-W} ->
> {HARDIRQ-ON-W} usage.
>
> Looking at lockdep.c isn't giving me any help either. It's obfuscated
> beyond my ability to grok by simply reading the code.
>
> It seems like this portion should help me, but it doesn't....
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: {IN-HARDIRQ-W} state was registered at:
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810afbca>]
> __lock_acquire+0x77a/0x1570
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810b0a64>] lock_acquire+0xa4/0x120
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81520c75>]
> _spin_lock_irqsave+0x55/0xa0
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa006b19b>] blk_done+0x2b/0x110
> [virtio_blk]
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa00401dc>]
> vring_interrupt+0x3c/0xd0 [virtio_ring]
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810ec080>]
> handle_IRQ_event+0x50/0x160
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810ee840>]
> handle_edge_irq+0xe0/0x170
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff8100e059>] handle_irq+0x49/0xa0
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81526cdc>] do_IRQ+0x6c/0xf0
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff8100ba93>] ret_from_intr+0x0/0x16
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810148e2>] default_idle+0x52/0xc0
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81009e0b>] cpu_idle+0xbb/0x110
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81516623>]
> start_secondary+0x211/0x254
>
> Then later it tells me that I'm holding 1 lock, which is the one that I
> mentioned at the beginning that was just recently locked.
>
>
2 things:
1. Documentation/lockdep-design.txt explains the "cryptic lock state
symbols".
2. Please post the lockdep splat _exactly_ as it appears, and _in full_
(and without line-wrapping, if possible). Usually lockdep is intelligent
enough to tell you the possible scenario that would lock up your system.
That gives a very good clue, in case you find it difficult to make out
what
is wrong from the cryptic symbols.
Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20111208/808a522b/attachment.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* What does inconsistent lock state mean?
2011-12-08 14:47 ` Srivatsa Bhat
@ 2011-12-08 18:20 ` Kai Meyer
2011-12-08 18:49 ` Srivatsa Bhat
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Kai Meyer @ 2011-12-08 18:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kernelnewbies
On 12/08/2011 07:47 AM, Srivatsa Bhat wrote:
> 2 things:
> 1. Documentation/lockdep-design.txt explains the "cryptic lock state
> symbols".
> 2. Please post the lockdep splat _exactly_ as it appears, and _in full_
> (and without line-wrapping, if possible). Usually lockdep is
> intelligent
> enough to tell you the possible scenario that would lock up your
> system.
> That gives a very good clue, in case you find it difficult to make
> out what
> is wrong from the cryptic symbols.
>
> Regards,
> Srivatsa S. Bhat
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kernelnewbies mailing list
> Kernelnewbies at kernelnewbies.org
> http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
Oh, sorry. I suppose I only included things that made any sense to me.
If I were to hazard a guess after reading through the design doc, it
sounds like there's a problem with the context in which locks are being
acquired? That seems odd to me, since I don't get the inconsistent lock
state until I'm trying to spin_unlock
&sblsnap_snapshot_table[i].sblsnap_lock (which is why I assume it's
listed as one that's currently held.
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: =================================
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: 2.6.32-220.el6.x86_64.debug #1
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: ---------------------------------
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: inconsistent {IN-HARDIRQ-W} ->
{HARDIRQ-ON-W} usage.
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: tee/1966 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes:
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: (&vblk->lock){?.-...}, at:
[<ffffffffa04c4d2a>] sblsnap_snap_now+0x25a/0x2a0 [sblsnap]
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: {IN-HARDIRQ-W} state was registered at:
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810afbca>]
__lock_acquire+0x77a/0x1570
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810b0a64>] lock_acquire+0xa4/0x120
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81520c75>]
_spin_lock_irqsave+0x55/0xa0
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa006b19b>] blk_done+0x2b/0x110
[virtio_blk]
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa00401dc>]
vring_interrupt+0x3c/0xd0 [virtio_ring]
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810ec080>]
handle_IRQ_event+0x50/0x160
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810ee840>]
handle_edge_irq+0xe0/0x170
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff8100e059>] handle_irq+0x49/0xa0
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81526cdc>] do_IRQ+0x6c/0xf0
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff8100ba93>] ret_from_intr+0x0/0x16
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810148e2>] default_idle+0x52/0xc0
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81009e0b>] cpu_idle+0xbb/0x110
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81516623>]
start_secondary+0x211/0x254
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: irq event stamp: 4699
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: hardirqs last enabled at (4699):
[<ffffffff81179e81>] __kmalloc+0x241/0x330
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: hardirqs last disabled at (4698):
[<ffffffff81179d60>] __kmalloc+0x120/0x330
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: softirqs last enabled at (4696):
[<ffffffff81076baa>] __do_softirq+0x14a/0x200
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: softirqs last disabled at (4681):
[<ffffffff8100c30c>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x30
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel:
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: other info that might help us debug this:
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: 1 lock held by tee/1966:
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: #0:
(&sblsnap_snapshot_table[i].sblsnap_lock){+.+.+.}, at:
[<ffffffffa04c4b7c>] sblsnap_snap_now+0xac/0x2a0 [sblsnap]
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel:
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: stack backtrace:
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: Pid: 1966, comm: tee Not tainted
2.6.32-220.el6.x86_64.debug #1
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: Call Trace:
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810ad947>] ?
print_usage_bug+0x177/0x180
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810ae8ed>] ? mark_lock+0x35d/0x430
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810afa59>] ?
__lock_acquire+0x609/0x1570
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810ab31d>] ?
trace_hardirqs_off+0xd/0x10
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff815208e7>] ?
_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x67/0x80
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff8106ec43>] ?
release_console_sem+0x203/0x250
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810b0a64>] ? lock_acquire+0xa4/0x120
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa04c4d2a>] ?
sblsnap_snap_now+0x25a/0x2a0 [sblsnap]
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81520af6>] ? _spin_lock+0x36/0x70
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa04c4d2a>] ?
sblsnap_snap_now+0x25a/0x2a0 [sblsnap]
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa04c4d2a>] ?
sblsnap_snap_now+0x25a/0x2a0 [sblsnap]
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa04c4de4>] ?
sblsnap_patch_blkdev+0x74/0x120 [sblsnap]
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa04c4eaf>] ?
sblsnap_get_snapshot+0x1f/0x60 [sblsnap]
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa04c4f59>] ?
sblsnap_create_snapshot+0x69/0x120 [sblsnap]
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa04c53cb>] ?
sblsnap_config_write+0x26b/0x2c0 [sblsnap]
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81200343>] ?
proc_file_write+0x73/0xb0
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff812002d0>] ? proc_file_write+0x0/0xb0
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff811f97c5>] ? proc_reg_write+0x85/0xc0
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81193318>] ? vfs_write+0xb8/0x1a0
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810e68b2>] ?
audit_syscall_entry+0x272/0x2a0
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81193d21>] ? sys_write+0x51/0x90
Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff8100b0b2>] ?
system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20111208/b711349a/attachment.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* What does inconsistent lock state mean?
2011-12-08 18:20 ` Kai Meyer
@ 2011-12-08 18:49 ` Srivatsa Bhat
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Srivatsa Bhat @ 2011-12-08 18:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kernelnewbies
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 11:50 PM, Kai Meyer <kai@gnukai.com> wrote:
> **
> On 12/08/2011 07:47 AM, Srivatsa Bhat wrote:
>
> 2 things:
> 1. Documentation/lockdep-design.txt explains the "cryptic lock state
> symbols".
> 2. Please post the lockdep splat _exactly_ as it appears, and _in full_
> (and without line-wrapping, if possible). Usually lockdep is
> intelligent
> enough to tell you the possible scenario that would lock up your
> system.
> That gives a very good clue, in case you find it difficult to make out
> what
> is wrong from the cryptic symbols.
>
> Regards,
> Srivatsa S. Bhat
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kernelnewbies mailing list
> Kernelnewbies at kernelnewbies.org
> http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
>
>
> Oh, sorry. I suppose I only included things that made any sense to me. If
> I were to hazard a guess after reading through the design doc, it sounds
> like there's a problem with the context in which locks are being acquired?
> That seems odd to me, since I don't get the inconsistent lock state until
> I'm trying to spin_unlock &sblsnap_snapshot_table[i].sblsnap_lock (which
> is why I assume it's listed as one that's currently held.
>
>
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: =================================
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: 2.6.32-220.el6.x86_64.debug #1
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: ---------------------------------
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: inconsistent {IN-HARDIRQ-W} -> {HARDIRQ-ON-W}
> usage.
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: tee/1966 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes:
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: (&vblk->lock){?.-...}, at:
> [<ffffffffa04c4d2a>] sblsnap_snap_now+0x25a/0x2a0 [sblsnap]
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: {IN-HARDIRQ-W} state was registered at:
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810afbca>]
> __lock_acquire+0x77a/0x1570
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810b0a64>] lock_acquire+0xa4/0x120
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81520c75>]
> _spin_lock_irqsave+0x55/0xa0
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa006b19b>] blk_done+0x2b/0x110
> [virtio_blk]
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa00401dc>]
> vring_interrupt+0x3c/0xd0 [virtio_ring]
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810ec080>]
> handle_IRQ_event+0x50/0x160
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810ee840>]
> handle_edge_irq+0xe0/0x170
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff8100e059>] handle_irq+0x49/0xa0
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81526cdc>] do_IRQ+0x6c/0xf0
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff8100ba93>] ret_from_intr+0x0/0x16
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810148e2>] default_idle+0x52/0xc0
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81009e0b>] cpu_idle+0xbb/0x110
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81516623>]
> start_secondary+0x211/0x254
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: irq event stamp: 4699
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: hardirqs last enabled at (4699):
> [<ffffffff81179e81>] __kmalloc+0x241/0x330
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: hardirqs last disabled at (4698):
> [<ffffffff81179d60>] __kmalloc+0x120/0x330
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: softirqs last enabled at (4696):
> [<ffffffff81076baa>] __do_softirq+0x14a/0x200
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: softirqs last disabled at (4681):
> [<ffffffff8100c30c>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x30
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel:
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: other info that might help us debug this:
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: 1 lock held by tee/1966:
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: #0:
> (&sblsnap_snapshot_table[i].sblsnap_lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffa04c4b7c>]
> sblsnap_snap_now+0xac/0x2a0 [sblsnap]
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel:
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: stack backtrace:
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: Pid: 1966, comm: tee Not tainted
> 2.6.32-220.el6.x86_64.debug #1
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: Call Trace:
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810ad947>] ?
> print_usage_bug+0x177/0x180
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810ae8ed>] ? mark_lock+0x35d/0x430
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810afa59>] ?
> __lock_acquire+0x609/0x1570
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810ab31d>] ?
> trace_hardirqs_off+0xd/0x10
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff815208e7>] ?
> _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x67/0x80
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff8106ec43>] ?
> release_console_sem+0x203/0x250
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810b0a64>] ? lock_acquire+0xa4/0x120
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa04c4d2a>] ?
> sblsnap_snap_now+0x25a/0x2a0 [sblsnap]
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81520af6>] ? _spin_lock+0x36/0x70
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa04c4d2a>] ?
> sblsnap_snap_now+0x25a/0x2a0 [sblsnap]
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa04c4d2a>] ?
> sblsnap_snap_now+0x25a/0x2a0 [sblsnap]
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa04c4de4>] ?
> sblsnap_patch_blkdev+0x74/0x120 [sblsnap]
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa04c4eaf>] ?
> sblsnap_get_snapshot+0x1f/0x60 [sblsnap]
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa04c4f59>] ?
> sblsnap_create_snapshot+0x69/0x120 [sblsnap]
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffffa04c53cb>] ?
> sblsnap_config_write+0x26b/0x2c0 [sblsnap]
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81200343>] ?
> proc_file_write+0x73/0xb0
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff812002d0>] ?
> proc_file_write+0x0/0xb0
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff811f97c5>] ?
> proc_reg_write+0x85/0xc0
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81193318>] ? vfs_write+0xb8/0x1a0
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff810e68b2>] ?
> audit_syscall_entry+0x272/0x2a0
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff81193d21>] ? sys_write+0x51/0x90
> Dec 7 15:52:20 dev2 kernel: [<ffffffff8100b0b2>] ?
> system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>
>
The line print_usage_bug_scenario(this); seems to be missing in your
kernel's print_usage_bug()
function in kernel/lockdep.c If it was there (it is there in newer
kernels), it would have showed
pictorially what is the problem, and then most likely you wouldn't have to
look at anything else
to figure out what's the problem! That's the reason I asked for full
output, but alas your lockdep
seems to be old.
Though, what exactly is the problem is not immediately apparent to me, I
would certainly
suggest using spin_lock_irqsave() and spin_unlock_irqrestore() functions,
instead of just using
the spin_lock() and spin_unlock() versions, whenever you are dealing with
locks that have the
possibility of being acquired by interrupt contexts (i.e., while servicing
interrupts).
Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20111209/a65c505d/attachment-0001.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-12-08 18:49 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-12-07 23:19 What does inconsistent lock state mean? Kai Meyer
2011-12-08 14:47 ` Srivatsa Bhat
2011-12-08 18:20 ` Kai Meyer
2011-12-08 18:49 ` Srivatsa Bhat
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.