From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: xfs freeze annotation problem on 3.6.0-rc3+ kernel
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 16:57:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120906145708.GB12539@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120906063921.749a850a@corrin.poochiereds.net>
On Thu 06-09-12 06:39:21, Jeff Layton wrote:
> I got the following xfs-related lockdep pop on a 3.6.0-rc3+ kernel.
> I've been able to reproduce this twice now by doing a kernel build on
> xfs.
>
> The last commit from Linus' tree in this kernel is 9acb172. It also has
> a pile of my own and Al Viro's patches on top, but I don't think any of
> them would affect this. I should be able to test patches for this if
> you come up with one, but since I've only seen it twice I'm not sure
> how reproducible it is yet.
>
> [ 4175.887865]
> [ 4175.888032] =========================================================
> [ 4175.888032] [ INFO: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected ]
> [ 4175.888032] 3.6.0-rc3+ #11 Not tainted
> [ 4175.888032] ---------------------------------------------------------
> [ 4175.888032] kswapd0/41 just changed the state of lock:
> [ 4175.888032] (sb_internal){.+.+.?}, at: [<ffffffffa00f60ad>] xfs_trans_alloc+0x2d/0x50 [xfs]
> [ 4175.888032] but this lock took another, RECLAIM_FS-unsafe lock in the past:
> [ 4175.888032] (&(&ip->i_lock)->mr_lock/1){+.+.+.}
> [ 4175.888032]
> [ 4175.888032] and interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them.
> [ 4175.888032]
> [ 4175.888032]
> [ 4175.888032] other info that might help us debug this:
> [ 4175.888032] Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario:
> [ 4175.888032]
> [ 4175.888032] CPU0 CPU1
> [ 4175.888032] ---- ----
> [ 4175.888032] lock(&(&ip->i_lock)->mr_lock/1);
> [ 4175.888032] local_irq_disable();
> [ 4175.888032] lock(sb_internal);
> [ 4175.888032] lock(&(&ip->i_lock)->mr_lock/1);
> [ 4175.888032] <Interrupt>
> [ 4175.888032] lock(sb_internal);
> [ 4175.888032]
> [ 4175.888032] *** DEADLOCK ***
This is actually known and has nothing to do with fs freezeing AFAICT.
The problem is tham vm_map_ram() can do GFP_KERNEL allocation from deep
inside XFS and that can cause deadlocks...
It has been discussed here https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/6/13/582, but mm guys
have some issues with the simple solution.
Honza
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-06 14:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-06 10:39 xfs freeze annotation problem on 3.6.0-rc3+ kernel Jeff Layton
2012-09-06 14:57 ` Jan Kara [this message]
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=20120906145708.GB12539@quack.suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).