linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [possible deadlock][3.1.0-g138c4ae] possible circular locking dependency detected
@ 2011-10-28  3:42 Wanlong Gao
  2011-10-28  5:44 ` Bob Liu
       [not found] ` <CAA_GA1eGt-Xu1wQ-g0v+J7CD4OEAU1nm1Eviww1+mOKjYWEcMg@mail.gmail.com>
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Wanlong Gao @ 2011-10-28  3:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm

Hi folks:

My dmesg said that:

======================================================
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
3.1.0-138c4ae #2
-------------------------------------------------------
hugemmap05/18198 is trying to acquire lock:
 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff8114d85c>] might_fault+0x5c/0xb0

but task is already holding lock:
 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#21){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff811a10f6>] vfs_readdir+0x86/0xe0

which lock already depends on the new lock.


the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #1 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#21){+.+.+.}:
       [<ffffffff810afd34>] validate_chain+0x704/0x860
       [<ffffffff810b018c>] __lock_acquire+0x2fc/0x500
       [<ffffffff810b0b01>] lock_acquire+0xb1/0x1a0
       [<ffffffff815464f2>] __mutex_lock_common+0x62/0x420
       [<ffffffff81546a1a>] mutex_lock_nested+0x4a/0x60
       [<ffffffff8120b4ba>] hugetlbfs_file_mmap+0xaa/0x160
       [<ffffffff81158071>] mmap_region+0x3e1/0x590
       [<ffffffff81158584>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x364/0x3b0
       [<ffffffff811587d9>] sys_mmap_pgoff+0x209/0x240
       [<ffffffff8101aac9>] sys_mmap+0x29/0x30
       [<ffffffff81551542>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

-> #0 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}:
       [<ffffffff810af607>] check_prev_add+0x537/0x560
       [<ffffffff810afd34>] validate_chain+0x704/0x860
       [<ffffffff810b018c>] __lock_acquire+0x2fc/0x500
       [<ffffffff810b0b01>] lock_acquire+0xb1/0x1a0
       [<ffffffff8114d889>] might_fault+0x89/0xb0
       [<ffffffff811a0f2e>] filldir+0x7e/0xe0
       [<ffffffff811b445e>] dcache_readdir+0x5e/0x230
       [<ffffffff811a1130>] vfs_readdir+0xc0/0xe0
       [<ffffffff811a12c9>] sys_getdents+0x89/0x100
       [<ffffffff81551542>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

other info that might help us debug this:

 Possible unsafe locking scenario:

       CPU0                    CPU1
       ----                    ----
  lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key);
                               lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
                               lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key);
  lock(&mm->mmap_sem);

 *** DEADLOCK ***

1 lock held by hugemmap05/18198:
 #0:  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#21){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff811a10f6>] vfs_readdir+0x86/0xe0

stack backtrace:
Pid: 18198, comm: hugemmap05 Not tainted 3.1.0-138c4ae #2
Call Trace:
 [<ffffffff810ad469>] print_circular_bug+0x109/0x110
 [<ffffffff810af607>] check_prev_add+0x537/0x560
 [<ffffffff8114e112>] ? do_anonymous_page+0xf2/0x2d0
 [<ffffffff810afd34>] validate_chain+0x704/0x860
 [<ffffffff810b018c>] __lock_acquire+0x2fc/0x500
 [<ffffffff810b0b01>] lock_acquire+0xb1/0x1a0
 [<ffffffff8114d85c>] ? might_fault+0x5c/0xb0
 [<ffffffff8114d889>] might_fault+0x89/0xb0
 [<ffffffff8114d85c>] ? might_fault+0x5c/0xb0
 [<ffffffff81546763>] ? __mutex_lock_common+0x2d3/0x420
 [<ffffffff811a10f6>] ? vfs_readdir+0x86/0xe0
 [<ffffffff811a0f2e>] filldir+0x7e/0xe0
 [<ffffffff811b445e>] dcache_readdir+0x5e/0x230
 [<ffffffff811a0eb0>] ? filldir64+0xf0/0xf0
 [<ffffffff811a0eb0>] ? filldir64+0xf0/0xf0
 [<ffffffff811a0eb0>] ? filldir64+0xf0/0xf0
 [<ffffffff811a1130>] vfs_readdir+0xc0/0xe0
 [<ffffffff8118e9be>] ? fget+0xee/0x220
 [<ffffffff8118e8d0>] ? fget_raw+0x220/0x220
 [<ffffffff811a12c9>] sys_getdents+0x89/0x100
 [<ffffffff81551542>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b



Wile hugemmap05 is a test case from LTP.
http://ltp.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=ltp/ltp.git;a=blob;f=testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/hugemmap/hugemmap05.c;h=50bb8ca23ae9686662740f9ea5d7187affff8b60;hb=HEAD

But I don't know how to reproduce this.


Thanks
-Wanlong Gao

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [possible deadlock][3.1.0-g138c4ae] possible circular locking dependency detected
  2011-10-28  3:42 [possible deadlock][3.1.0-g138c4ae] possible circular locking dependency detected Wanlong Gao
@ 2011-10-28  5:44 ` Bob Liu
       [not found] ` <CAA_GA1eGt-Xu1wQ-g0v+J7CD4OEAU1nm1Eviww1+mOKjYWEcMg@mail.gmail.com>
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Bob Liu @ 2011-10-28  5:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gaowanlong; +Cc: linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm

On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Hi folks:
>
> My dmesg said that:
>
> ======================================================
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 3.1.0-138c4ae #2
> -------------------------------------------------------
> hugemmap05/18198 is trying to acquire lock:
>  (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff8114d85c>] might_fault+0x5c/0xb0
>
> but task is already holding lock:
>  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#21){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff811a10f6>] vfs_readdir+0x86/0xe0
>
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
>
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>
> -> #1 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#21){+.+.+.}:
>       [<ffffffff810afd34>] validate_chain+0x704/0x860
>       [<ffffffff810b018c>] __lock_acquire+0x2fc/0x500
>       [<ffffffff810b0b01>] lock_acquire+0xb1/0x1a0
>       [<ffffffff815464f2>] __mutex_lock_common+0x62/0x420
>       [<ffffffff81546a1a>] mutex_lock_nested+0x4a/0x60
>       [<ffffffff8120b4ba>] hugetlbfs_file_mmap+0xaa/0x160
>       [<ffffffff81158071>] mmap_region+0x3e1/0x590
>       [<ffffffff81158584>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x364/0x3b0
>       [<ffffffff811587d9>] sys_mmap_pgoff+0x209/0x240
>       [<ffffffff8101aac9>] sys_mmap+0x29/0x30
>       [<ffffffff81551542>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>
> -> #0 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}:
>       [<ffffffff810af607>] check_prev_add+0x537/0x560
>       [<ffffffff810afd34>] validate_chain+0x704/0x860
>       [<ffffffff810b018c>] __lock_acquire+0x2fc/0x500
>       [<ffffffff810b0b01>] lock_acquire+0xb1/0x1a0
>       [<ffffffff8114d889>] might_fault+0x89/0xb0
>       [<ffffffff811a0f2e>] filldir+0x7e/0xe0
>       [<ffffffff811b445e>] dcache_readdir+0x5e/0x230
>       [<ffffffff811a1130>] vfs_readdir+0xc0/0xe0
>       [<ffffffff811a12c9>] sys_getdents+0x89/0x100
>       [<ffffffff81551542>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
>  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
>       CPU0                    CPU1
>       ----                    ----
>  lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key);
>                               lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
>                               lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key);
>  lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
>
>  *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> 1 lock held by hugemmap05/18198:
>  #0:  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#21){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff811a10f6>] vfs_readdir+0x86/0xe0
>
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 18198, comm: hugemmap05 Not tainted 3.1.0-138c4ae #2
> Call Trace:
>  [<ffffffff810ad469>] print_circular_bug+0x109/0x110
>  [<ffffffff810af607>] check_prev_add+0x537/0x560
>  [<ffffffff8114e112>] ? do_anonymous_page+0xf2/0x2d0
>  [<ffffffff810afd34>] validate_chain+0x704/0x860
>  [<ffffffff810b018c>] __lock_acquire+0x2fc/0x500
>  [<ffffffff810b0b01>] lock_acquire+0xb1/0x1a0
>  [<ffffffff8114d85c>] ? might_fault+0x5c/0xb0
>  [<ffffffff8114d889>] might_fault+0x89/0xb0
>  [<ffffffff8114d85c>] ? might_fault+0x5c/0xb0
>  [<ffffffff81546763>] ? __mutex_lock_common+0x2d3/0x420
>  [<ffffffff811a10f6>] ? vfs_readdir+0x86/0xe0
>  [<ffffffff811a0f2e>] filldir+0x7e/0xe0
>  [<ffffffff811b445e>] dcache_readdir+0x5e/0x230
>  [<ffffffff811a0eb0>] ? filldir64+0xf0/0xf0
>  [<ffffffff811a0eb0>] ? filldir64+0xf0/0xf0
>  [<ffffffff811a0eb0>] ? filldir64+0xf0/0xf0
>  [<ffffffff811a1130>] vfs_readdir+0xc0/0xe0
>  [<ffffffff8118e9be>] ? fget+0xee/0x220
>  [<ffffffff8118e8d0>] ? fget_raw+0x220/0x220
>  [<ffffffff811a12c9>] sys_getdents+0x89/0x100
>  [<ffffffff81551542>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>

Please try this patch "lockdep: Add helper function for dir vs file
i_mutex annotation" by josh.
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git;a=commitdiff;h=e096d0c7e2e4e5893792db865dd065ac73cf1f00

>
>
> Wile hugemmap05 is a test case from LTP.
> http://ltp.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=ltp/ltp.git;a=blob;f=testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/hugemmap/hugemmap05.c;h=50bb8ca23ae9686662740f9ea5d7187affff8b60;hb=HEAD
>
> But I don't know how to reproduce this.
>
>
> Thanks
> -Wanlong Gao
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
>

-- 
Regards,
--Bob

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [possible deadlock][3.1.0-g138c4ae] possible circular locking dependency detected
       [not found]   ` <4EAA4263.2090809@cn.fujitsu.com>
@ 2011-10-28  6:02     ` Bob Liu
  2011-10-28  6:11       ` Wanlong Gao
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Bob Liu @ 2011-10-28  6:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gaowanlong; +Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel, Linux-MM

On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> On 10/28/2011 01:44 PM, Bob Liu wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>>> Hi folks:
>>>
>>> My dmesg said that:
>>>
>>> ======================================================
>>> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
>>> 3.1.0-138c4ae #2
>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>> hugemmap05/18198 is trying to acquire lock:
>>>  (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff8114d85c>] might_fault+0x5c/0xb0
>>>
>>> but task is already holding lock:
>>>  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#21){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff811a10f6>] vfs_readdir+0x86/0xe0
>>>
>>> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>>>
>>>
>>> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>>>
>>> -> #1 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#21){+.+.+.}:
>>>       [<ffffffff810afd34>] validate_chain+0x704/0x860
>>>       [<ffffffff810b018c>] __lock_acquire+0x2fc/0x500
>>>       [<ffffffff810b0b01>] lock_acquire+0xb1/0x1a0
>>>       [<ffffffff815464f2>] __mutex_lock_common+0x62/0x420
>>>       [<ffffffff81546a1a>] mutex_lock_nested+0x4a/0x60
>>>       [<ffffffff8120b4ba>] hugetlbfs_file_mmap+0xaa/0x160
>>>       [<ffffffff81158071>] mmap_region+0x3e1/0x590
>>>       [<ffffffff81158584>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x364/0x3b0
>>>       [<ffffffff811587d9>] sys_mmap_pgoff+0x209/0x240
>>>       [<ffffffff8101aac9>] sys_mmap+0x29/0x30
>>>       [<ffffffff81551542>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>>>
>>> -> #0 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}:
>>>       [<ffffffff810af607>] check_prev_add+0x537/0x560
>>>       [<ffffffff810afd34>] validate_chain+0x704/0x860
>>>       [<ffffffff810b018c>] __lock_acquire+0x2fc/0x500
>>>       [<ffffffff810b0b01>] lock_acquire+0xb1/0x1a0
>>>       [<ffffffff8114d889>] might_fault+0x89/0xb0
>>>       [<ffffffff811a0f2e>] filldir+0x7e/0xe0
>>>       [<ffffffff811b445e>] dcache_readdir+0x5e/0x230
>>>       [<ffffffff811a1130>] vfs_readdir+0xc0/0xe0
>>>       [<ffffffff811a12c9>] sys_getdents+0x89/0x100
>>>       [<ffffffff81551542>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>>>
>>> other info that might help us debug this:
>>>
>>>  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>>>
>>>       CPU0                    CPU1
>>>       ----                    ----
>>>  lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key);
>>>                               lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
>>>                               lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key);
>>>  lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
>>>
>>>  *** DEADLOCK ***
>>>
>>> 1 lock held by hugemmap05/18198:
>>>  #0:  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#21){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff811a10f6>] vfs_readdir+0x86/0xe0
>>>
>>> stack backtrace:
>>> Pid: 18198, comm: hugemmap05 Not tainted 3.1.0-138c4ae #2
>>> Call Trace:
>>>  [<ffffffff810ad469>] print_circular_bug+0x109/0x110
>>>  [<ffffffff810af607>] check_prev_add+0x537/0x560
>>>  [<ffffffff8114e112>] ? do_anonymous_page+0xf2/0x2d0
>>>  [<ffffffff810afd34>] validate_chain+0x704/0x860
>>>  [<ffffffff810b018c>] __lock_acquire+0x2fc/0x500
>>>  [<ffffffff810b0b01>] lock_acquire+0xb1/0x1a0
>>>  [<ffffffff8114d85c>] ? might_fault+0x5c/0xb0
>>>  [<ffffffff8114d889>] might_fault+0x89/0xb0
>>>  [<ffffffff8114d85c>] ? might_fault+0x5c/0xb0
>>>  [<ffffffff81546763>] ? __mutex_lock_common+0x2d3/0x420
>>>  [<ffffffff811a10f6>] ? vfs_readdir+0x86/0xe0
>>>  [<ffffffff811a0f2e>] filldir+0x7e/0xe0
>>>  [<ffffffff811b445e>] dcache_readdir+0x5e/0x230
>>>  [<ffffffff811a0eb0>] ? filldir64+0xf0/0xf0
>>>  [<ffffffff811a0eb0>] ? filldir64+0xf0/0xf0
>>>  [<ffffffff811a0eb0>] ? filldir64+0xf0/0xf0
>>>  [<ffffffff811a1130>] vfs_readdir+0xc0/0xe0
>>>  [<ffffffff8118e9be>] ? fget+0xee/0x220
>>>  [<ffffffff8118e8d0>] ? fget_raw+0x220/0x220
>>>  [<ffffffff811a12c9>] sys_getdents+0x89/0x100
>>>  [<ffffffff81551542>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>>>
>>
>> Please try this patch "lockdep: Add helper function for dir vs file
>> i_mutex annotation" by josh.
>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git;a=commitdiff;h=e096d0c7e2e4e5893792db865dd065ac73cf1f00
>>
>
>
> Oh, it looks like can fix this bug, but I also can't reproduce it whether with or without this patch.
>

Make sure CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC was set.

-- 
Regards,
--Bob

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [possible deadlock][3.1.0-g138c4ae] possible circular locking dependency detected
  2011-10-28  6:02     ` Bob Liu
@ 2011-10-28  6:11       ` Wanlong Gao
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Wanlong Gao @ 2011-10-28  6:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bob Liu; +Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel, Linux-MM

On 10/28/2011 02:02 PM, Bob Liu wrote:


>>
>>
>> Oh, it looks like can fix this bug, but I also can't reproduce it whether with or without this patch.
>>
> 
> Make sure CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC was set.
> 


Yeah, certainly, if not, the dmesg can't appear anyway.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2011-10-28  6:11 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-10-28  3:42 [possible deadlock][3.1.0-g138c4ae] possible circular locking dependency detected Wanlong Gao
2011-10-28  5:44 ` Bob Liu
     [not found] ` <CAA_GA1eGt-Xu1wQ-g0v+J7CD4OEAU1nm1Eviww1+mOKjYWEcMg@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found]   ` <4EAA4263.2090809@cn.fujitsu.com>
2011-10-28  6:02     ` Bob Liu
2011-10-28  6:11       ` Wanlong Gao

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).