From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E9E8CA6B; Sun, 6 Apr 2025 20:06:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.17 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743969975; cv=none; b=HJCAwTFqMIuL29lPxGYSX5+wXkaKiVZfAwNsVn4NN1Ab4YIkXnw+Mv7rJ11i6QCQ7UTSvdW4Yy1C6bSoNXH2EN9OgjmDT+I0zIOyOm/jX4ypWQbsK9OtcdoGgRvbloWjIOjqC3InEHqPM4mPLz/r0TqkL4rlf3gAWAqAtl/4hGE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743969975; c=relaxed/simple; bh=kqXpkAZobw0z/QtawS9MtkY6Uld0bwSNru6iFQNPH2w=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=MCrghP+VNzLoyHhnmxbv6M9KB9fKxeWNkpvflvVQV3ZlazWulo45S56QCirGHV+pYGDFqZwHSlkVko7PLONLfrlN3gY/8GMqSm+RrFtAV0CX7RpDKu82TdxHHW8Du4+xOHLHzCKjmKdicpnBKOG+g+VSswJFGaFA0JkhUS0uwx4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=QKqcwRS8; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.17 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="QKqcwRS8" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1743969973; x=1775505973; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=kqXpkAZobw0z/QtawS9MtkY6Uld0bwSNru6iFQNPH2w=; b=QKqcwRS8ztAzS4jWh6thV0XTtwUn30nvrP9pWfQ/XLPEqgXk/sLZXCjJ ZcmaIJAkbQatnPgGDFqQMG1yF2siPbusfCdqFtBFR44n4YJZkzUuNuB0u /sSE3P8Zf5MI37ht/HfX9so/3SsQaX/1R5M3G+s+DyNVZp50awHp7Lpt2 XfiQ4FOWe3z206iVFhF/WCW7W8HubDLBzv7AvsYLx03wiGejNXNMpSpxs Rcy4a2E+pXGcX4ZwJwJqyHcKbAGDbIDvWVb20baWajsjDSC71CNGIdmmI 1E+0mpZ68haxF4KK8PSw96M+K1EJvIkk/rIyHmRfNn0qZQdkI9PY9yntQ g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: z04YZDcNQ7qd5o7dILvv7w== X-CSE-MsgGUID: HNl4tYJbQVKP5UqgjkJ6HQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11396"; a="45363115" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,193,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="45363115" Received: from orviesa005.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.145]) by orvoesa109.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Apr 2025 13:06:12 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: LJOtVJ0oQNGznx11Hc0yAQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: 5j4nyi6LTGmCAgWCMBGe+g== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,193,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="132981261" Received: from agluck-desk3.sc.intel.com (HELO agluck-desk3) ([172.25.222.70]) by orviesa005-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Apr 2025 13:06:12 -0700 Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2025 13:06:11 -0700 From: "Luck, Tony" To: Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=F6m?= Cc: Jens Axboe , Ming Lei , linux-block@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: lockdep warnings from upstream build Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Sat, Apr 05, 2025 at 04:45:50PM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote: > Several email threads on this over the past few days, but none > seem to be getting much attention: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/?q=%22%28%26q-%3Eelevator_lock%29%7B%2B.%2B.%7D-%7B4%3A4%7D%2C+at%3A+elv_iosched_store%22 > > Since tomorrow is "-rc1" day I thought I'd add my lockdep splat to the > mix. > > System is a 2-socket Icelake. Kernel built from: > > f4d2ef48250a ("Merge tag 'kbuild-v6.15' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/masahiroy/linux-kbuild") > > Though I saw the same thing a few days ago, so the problem was > introduced much earlier in the merge window. Bisecting leads to this: ffa1e7ada456 ("block: Make request_queue lockdep splats show up earlier") Which may be doing what it says on the tin. But, I don't think I've ever seen the "type 1 splats" on this machine even though every kernel I build has lockdep enabled. So it this showing up a real problem that happens to be very difficult to hit? Or has it introduced a false positive? -Tony