From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] lockdep splat with kernfs lockdep annotations and slab
 mutex from drm patch??
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 08:38:37 -0700
Message-ID: <20190614153837.GE538958@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com>
References: <20190614093914.58f41d8f@gandalf.local.home>
 <156052491337.7796.17642747687124632554@skylake-alporthouse-com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <156052491337.7796.17642747687124632554@skylake-alporthouse-com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>, David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

Hello,

On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 04:08:33PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> #ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG
>         if (slab_state >= FULL && err >= 0 && is_root_cache(s)) {
>                 struct kmem_cache *c;
> 
>                 mutex_lock(&slab_mutex);
> 
> so it happens to hit the error + FULL case with the additional slabcaches?
> 
> Anyway, according to lockdep, it is dangerous to use the slab_mutex inside
> slab_attr_store().

Didn't really look into the code but it looks like slab_mutex is held
while trying to remove sysfs files.  sysfs file removal flushes
on-going accesses, so if a file operation then tries to grab a mutex
which is held during removal, it leads to a deadlock.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun