From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (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 2F6F91AF0AB for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2024 12:15:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1733314508; cv=none; b=JOx4+YXSWcR+/M7RZNuZPNc9kvFAK09daZ0gbcjxuagyI6/lT5ly6DFWSQVEg84TXaw+quBURd/P9dEMGMC/yFdsDjQD39EFM/+itxVvcgaNhmr/jCwXlv9/MUuPqsphX9gGVGSFkWw+Slpf+OdLFE3D6VIxeXVACOA7dUQS9xk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1733314508; c=relaxed/simple; bh=VM/IjnUOoYmaXM9BjcHi0kTxMdNJTkJ8qRoPit9JiX4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=jq3HB4fB02YjPgzG0kACcDF8QbppNmQEzHoQrYGQr2Vw29Xvm5cE+xItXMR7jHiWpqBYiSBogsXdQwV6DJ7IsxzY0tGeK8NYCLtFrEzp7aKKlF4mitd1RaCV8nr1gWPfoPUMC2u2b7tomXRSBe0esWjJQ/EbF8FDyWEiL46BsKg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=HzJK3Kdv; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="HzJK3Kdv" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1733314506; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=lx+GC+/nemnWHzZ45M7hMXvsnmVcB+AgrZQMoaW8xeQ=; b=HzJK3KdvFdwaKqe0o/+Q4phFC/lMaVeQd4huFYm1aJfbvyYfIbxw5AUD+e2dfWSFRIxkTm NIJxUsxnAVs/jT7TKI9Nxk51qjUPOs4Nj9s64HsbNqGBOaY02uQy5qV14RxZIi7PZaioqD 0cdI4SpcAoOehhlEzLccNe6EW4k1v3c= Received: from mx-prod-mc-04.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-659-mlVSwX70PT69VKblSRyVwg-1; Wed, 04 Dec 2024 07:15:00 -0500 X-MC-Unique: mlVSwX70PT69VKblSRyVwg-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: mlVSwX70PT69VKblSRyVwg Received: from mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.17]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-04.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFDBA1955F4A; Wed, 4 Dec 2024 12:14:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fedora (unknown [10.72.112.144]) by mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C41B41956048; Wed, 4 Dec 2024 12:14:52 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2024 20:14:47 +0800 From: Ming Lei To: Johan Hovold Cc: Jens Axboe , Christoph Hellwig , Alan Stern , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, usb-storage@lists.one-eyed-alien.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, regressions@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: Lockdep splat on UMS disconnect (6.13-rc1) Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-usb@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: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.17 On Wed, Dec 04, 2024 at 12:26:53PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote: > Hi, > > I'm seeing a new lockdep splat with 6.13-rc1 on resume after having > disconnected a USB mass storage device while suspended. This does not > seem to show up with 6.12. > > On one attempt to reproduce this with a ThinkPad T14s, the NVMe was > hosed after resume as well so I fear that this is not just about missing > annotation. > > I don't have time to look into this myself right now so I'm reporting in > the hope that someone familiar with these paths would be able to > pinpoint any potential regression without too much effort. > The dependency between lock(&q->q_usage_counter(queue)#3) and lock(&q->limits_lock) is real trouble. The real deadlock was reported before: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/ZxG38G9BuFdBpBHZ@fedora/ And the warning can be triggered by the following command too: echo 'none' > /sys/block/sda/queue/write_cache Thanks, Ming