From: Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>
To: tyhicks@linux.vnet.ibm.com, kirkland@canonical.com,
ecryptfs-devel@lists.launchpad.net
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Yet another lockdep issue reported with ecryptfs
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2009 17:41:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <adaprcj29y5.fsf_-_@cisco.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ada1vp0dmsf.fsf@cisco.com> (Roland Dreier's message of "Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:08:16 -0700")
And yet another lockdep report from ecryptfs, related to lower_file_mutex:
=================================
[ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
2.6.31-2-generic #14~rbd3
---------------------------------
inconsistent {RECLAIM_FS-ON-W} -> {IN-RECLAIM_FS-W} usage.
kswapd0/323 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes:
(&inode_info->lower_file_mutex){+.+.?.}, at: [<ffffffff81210d34>] ecryptfs_destroy_inode+0x34/0x100
{RECLAIM_FS-ON-W} state was registered at:
[<ffffffff8108c02c>] mark_held_locks+0x6c/0xa0
[<ffffffff8108c10f>] lockdep_trace_alloc+0xaf/0xe0
[<ffffffff81125a51>] kmem_cache_alloc+0x41/0x1a0
[<ffffffff8113117a>] get_empty_filp+0x7a/0x1a0
[<ffffffff8112dd46>] dentry_open+0x36/0xc0
[<ffffffff8121a36c>] ecryptfs_privileged_open+0x5c/0x2e0
[<ffffffff81210283>] ecryptfs_init_persistent_file+0xa3/0xe0
[<ffffffff8120e838>] ecryptfs_lookup_and_interpose_lower+0x278/0x380
[<ffffffff8120f97a>] ecryptfs_lookup+0x12a/0x250
[<ffffffff8113930a>] real_lookup+0xea/0x160
[<ffffffff8113afc8>] do_lookup+0xb8/0xf0
[<ffffffff8113b518>] __link_path_walk+0x518/0x870
[<ffffffff8113bd9c>] path_walk+0x5c/0xc0
[<ffffffff8113be5b>] do_path_lookup+0x5b/0xa0
[<ffffffff8113bfe7>] user_path_at+0x57/0xa0
[<ffffffff811340dc>] vfs_fstatat+0x3c/0x80
[<ffffffff8113424b>] vfs_stat+0x1b/0x20
[<ffffffff81134274>] sys_newstat+0x24/0x50
[<ffffffff81013132>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
[<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
irq event stamp: 7811
hardirqs last enabled at (7811): [<ffffffff810c037f>] call_rcu+0x5f/0x90
hardirqs last disabled at (7810): [<ffffffff810c0353>] call_rcu+0x33/0x90
softirqs last enabled at (3764): [<ffffffff810631da>] __do_softirq+0x14a/0x220
softirqs last disabled at (3751): [<ffffffff8101440c>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x30
other info that might help us debug this:
2 locks held by kswapd0/323:
#0: (shrinker_rwsem){++++..}, at: [<ffffffff810f67ed>] shrink_slab+0x3d/0x190
#1: (&type->s_umount_key#35){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffff811429a1>] prune_dcache+0xd1/0x1b0
stack backtrace:
Pid: 323, comm: kswapd0 Tainted: G C 2.6.31-2-generic #14~rbd3
Call Trace:
[<ffffffff8108ad6c>] print_usage_bug+0x18c/0x1a0
[<ffffffff8108aff0>] ? check_usage_forwards+0x0/0xc0
[<ffffffff8108bac2>] mark_lock_irq+0xf2/0x280
[<ffffffff8108bd87>] mark_lock+0x137/0x1d0
[<ffffffff81164710>] ? fsnotify_clear_marks_by_inode+0x30/0xf0
[<ffffffff8108bee6>] mark_irqflags+0xc6/0x1a0
[<ffffffff8108d337>] __lock_acquire+0x287/0x430
[<ffffffff8108d585>] lock_acquire+0xa5/0x150
[<ffffffff81210d34>] ? ecryptfs_destroy_inode+0x34/0x100
[<ffffffff8108d2e7>] ? __lock_acquire+0x237/0x430
[<ffffffff815526ad>] __mutex_lock_common+0x4d/0x3d0
[<ffffffff81210d34>] ? ecryptfs_destroy_inode+0x34/0x100
[<ffffffff81164710>] ? fsnotify_clear_marks_by_inode+0x30/0xf0
[<ffffffff81210d34>] ? ecryptfs_destroy_inode+0x34/0x100
[<ffffffff8129a91e>] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x5e/0xb0
[<ffffffff81552b36>] mutex_lock_nested+0x46/0x60
[<ffffffff81210d34>] ecryptfs_destroy_inode+0x34/0x100
[<ffffffff81145d27>] destroy_inode+0x87/0xd0
[<ffffffff81146b4c>] generic_delete_inode+0x12c/0x1a0
[<ffffffff81145832>] iput+0x62/0x70
[<ffffffff811423c8>] dentry_iput+0x98/0x110
[<ffffffff81142550>] d_kill+0x50/0x80
[<ffffffff81142623>] prune_one_dentry+0xa3/0xc0
[<ffffffff811428b1>] __shrink_dcache_sb+0x271/0x290
[<ffffffff811429d9>] prune_dcache+0x109/0x1b0
[<ffffffff81142abf>] shrink_dcache_memory+0x3f/0x50
[<ffffffff810f68dd>] shrink_slab+0x12d/0x190
[<ffffffff810f9377>] balance_pgdat+0x4d7/0x640
[<ffffffff8104c4c0>] ? finish_task_switch+0x40/0x150
[<ffffffff810f63c0>] ? isolate_pages_global+0x0/0x60
[<ffffffff810f95f7>] kswapd+0x117/0x170
[<ffffffff810777a0>] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x40
[<ffffffff810f94e0>] ? kswapd+0x0/0x170
[<ffffffff810773be>] kthread+0x9e/0xb0
[<ffffffff8101430a>] child_rip+0xa/0x20
[<ffffffff81013c90>] ? restore_args+0x0/0x30
[<ffffffff81077320>] ? kthread+0x0/0xb0
[<ffffffff81014300>] ? child_rip+0x0/0x20
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-02 0:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-01 17:06 lockdep reported AB-BA problem in ecryptfs Roland Dreier
2009-07-01 22:48 ` [PATCH] eCryptfs: Fix lockdep-reported AB-BA mutex issue Roland Dreier
2009-07-02 19:20 ` Tyler Hicks
2009-07-04 22:04 ` Roland Dreier
2009-07-01 23:08 ` Another lockdep issue reported with ecryptfs Roland Dreier
2009-07-02 0:31 ` Roland Dreier
2009-07-02 0:41 ` Roland Dreier [this message]
2009-07-02 3:58 ` Yet another " Roland Dreier
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=adaprcj29y5.fsf_-_@cisco.com \
--to=rdreier@cisco.com \
--cc=ecryptfs-devel@lists.launchpad.net \
--cc=kirkland@canonical.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tyhicks@linux.vnet.ibm.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.