From: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: 4.6-rc7 xfs circular locking dependency
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 10:52:00 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57337140.3020905@sandisk.com> (raw)
Hi Dave,
While retesting the SRP initiator with xfstests on top of an XFS filesystem I
hit the below call trace once. I do not expect that this is related to the SRP
initiator changes I made. Please let me know if you need more information.
Thanks,
Bart.
======================================================
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
4.6.0-rc7-dbg+ #1 Not tainted
-------------------------------------------------------
fsstress/17356 is trying to acquire lock:
(sb_internal#2){++++.+}, at: [<ffffffff81193172>] __sb_start_write+0xb2/0xf0
but task is already holding lock:
(&s->s_sync_lock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff811bba2d>] sync_inodes_sb+0xbd/0x1d0
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
nc_lock){+.+...}:
[<ffffffff810a4e70>] lock_acquire+0x60/0x80
[<ffffffff81582d2f>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5f/0x360
[<ffffffff811bba2d>] sync_inodes_sb+0xbd/0x1d0
[<ffffffffa0616963>] xfs_flush_inodes+0x23/0x30 [xfs]
[<ffffffffa060ea9f>] xfs_create+0x46f/0x5f0 [xfs]
[<ffffffffa0609f39>] xfs_generic_create+0x1b9/0x290 [xfs]
[<ffffffffa060a03f>] xfs_vn_mknod+0xf/0x20 [xfs]
[<ffffffffa060a07e>] xfs_vn_create+0xe/0x10 [xfs]
[<ffffffff8119af96>] vfs_create+0x76/0xd0
[<ffffffff8119f13e>] path_openat+0xc1e/0x10d0
[<ffffffff811a04d9>] do_filp_open+0x79/0xd0
[<ffffffff8118f636>] do_sys_open+0x116/0x1f0
[<ffffffff8118f769>] SyS_creat+0x19/0x20
[<ffffffff81585fe5>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x18/0xa8
nal#2){++++.+}:
[<ffffffff810a461f>] __lock_acquire+0x1b0f/0x1b20
[<ffffffff810a4e70>] lock_acquire+0x60/0x80
[<ffffffff8109edd5>] percpu_down_read+0x45/0x90
[<ffffffff81193172>] __sb_start_write+0xb2/0xf0
[<ffffffffa061838f>] xfs_trans_alloc+0x1f/0x40 [xfs]
[<ffffffffa060f4d0>] xfs_inactive_truncate+0x20/0x130 [xfs]
[<ffffffffa060fc9e>] xfs_inactive+0x1ae/0x1e0 [xfs]
[<ffffffffa0614e88>] xfs_fs_evict_inode+0xb8/0xc0 [xfs]
[<ffffffff811acc83>] evict+0xb3/0x180
[<ffffffff811acefc>] iput+0x14c/0x1e0
[<ffffffff811bbab5>] sync_inodes_sb+0x145/0x1d0
[<ffffffff811c23e0>] sync_inodes_one_sb+0x10/0x20
[<ffffffff81193bda>] iterate_supers+0xaa/0x100
[<ffffffff811c26d0>] sys_sync+0x30/0x90
[<ffffffff81585fe5>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x18/0xa8
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(&s->s_sync_lock);
lock(sb_internal#2);
lock(&s->s_sync_lock);
lock(sb_internal#2);
*** DEADLOCK ***
2 locks held by fsstress/17356:
#0: (&type->s_umount_key#34){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff81193bc4>] iterate_supers+0x94/0x100
#1: (&s->s_sync_lock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff811bba2d>] sync_inodes_sb+0xbd/0x1d0
stack backtrace:
CPU: 2 PID: 17356 Comm: fsstress Not tainted 4.6.0-rc7-dbg+ #1
Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R430/03XKDV, BIOS 1.0.2 11/17/2014
0000000000000000 ffff880442b3bbe0 ffffffff812ac6b5 ffffffff8238e0c0
ffffffff8238e0c0 ffff880442b3bc20 ffffffff810a1233 ffff880442b3bc70
ffff8804153635c0 ffff880415363598 ffff880415362d80 ffff880415363570
Call Trace:
[<ffffffff812ac6b5>] dump_stack+0x67/0x92
[<ffffffff810a1233>] print_circular_bug+0x1e3/0x250
[<ffffffff810a461f>] __lock_acquire+0x1b0f/0x1b20
[<ffffffff8112382f>] ? truncate_inode_pages_range+0x2af/0x790
[<ffffffff810a4e70>] lock_acquire+0x60/0x80
[<ffffffff81193172>] ? __sb_start_write+0xb2/0xf0
[<ffffffff8109edd5>] percpu_down_read+0x45/0x90
[<ffffffff81193172>] ? __sb_start_write+0xb2/0xf0
[<ffffffff81193172>] __sb_start_write+0xb2/0xf0
[<ffffffff810a266f>] ? mark_held_locks+0x6f/0xa0
[<ffffffffa061838f>] xfs_trans_alloc+0x1f/0x40 [xfs]
[<ffffffffa060f4d0>] xfs_inactive_truncate+0x20/0x130 [xfs]
[<ffffffffa060fc9e>] xfs_inactive+0x1ae/0x1e0 [xfs]
[<ffffffffa0614e88>] xfs_fs_evict_inode+0xb8/0xc0 [xfs]
[<ffffffff811acc83>] evict+0xb3/0x180
[<ffffffff811acefc>] iput+0x14c/0x1e0
[<ffffffff811bbab5>] sync_inodes_sb+0x145/0x1d0
[<ffffffff811c23d0>] ? SyS_tee+0x400/0x400
[<ffffffff811c23e0>] sync_inodes_one_sb+0x10/0x20
[<ffffffff81193bda>] iterate_supers+0xaa/0x100
[<ffffffff811c26d0>] sys_sync+0x30/0x90
[<ffffffff81585fe5>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x18/0xa8
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next reply other threads:[~2016-05-11 17:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-11 17:52 Bart Van Assche [this message]
2016-05-11 23:07 ` 4.6-rc7 xfs circular locking dependency Dave Chinner
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=57337140.3020905@sandisk.com \
--to=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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.