From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Sage Weil <sage@newdream.net>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: inconsistent lock state on 2.6.30?
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:35:58 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090626173558.GA402@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0906241438100.24641@cobra.newdream.net>
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 02:40:42PM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
> [ 7822.230090] =================================
> [ 7822.230208] [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
> [ 7822.230208] 2.6.30 #22
> [ 7822.230208] ---------------------------------
> [ 7822.230208] inconsistent {RECLAIM_FS-ON-W} -> {IN-RECLAIM_FS-W} usage.
> [ 7822.230208] kswapd0/290 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes:
> [ 7822.230208] (&(&ip->i_iolock)->mr_lock){++++?+}, at: [<ffffffff803af53a>] xfs_ilock+0x27/0x79
> [ 7822.230208] {RECLAIM_FS-ON-W} state was registered at:
> [ 7822.230208] [<ffffffff8025c297>] mark_held_locks+0x4d/0x6b
> [ 7822.230208] [<ffffffff8025c35d>] lockdep_trace_alloc+0xa8/0xc3
> [ 7822.230208] [<ffffffff80287c4e>] __alloc_pages_internal+0x6d/0x457
> [ 7822.230208] [<ffffffff802a7eb6>] alloc_pages_current+0xbe/0xc6
> [ 7822.230208] [<ffffffff80281c19>] grab_cache_page_write_begin+0x5e/0xa2
> [ 7822.230208] [<ffffffff802d2aa5>] block_write_begin+0x3d/0xcf
> [ 7822.230208] [<ffffffff803cb634>] xfs_vm_write_begin+0x25/0x27
> [ 7822.230208] [<ffffffff802825ba>] generic_file_buffered_write+0x139/0x2ff
> [ 7822.230208] [<ffffffff803d172a>] xfs_write+0x4de/0x717
That's actually a different but slightly related one.
But thinking about I came to the conclusion that both the previous and
this one actually are false positives
Both of them actually fit into the earlier reports of i_lock dependencies
inside the inode relcaim path causing problems for normal runtime use
of the fs. But unlike the previous mmap path where we really have
exclusive lock chains I'm not so sure about this one. Give me some time
to sort out the reclaim path which I'll need to do anyway for the
various nfs-related issues hitting the list.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-26 17:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-23 16:26 inconsistent lock state on 2.6.30? Sage Weil
2009-06-23 17:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-06-24 5:52 ` Sage Weil
2009-06-24 21:40 ` Sage Weil
2009-06-26 17:35 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2009-07-10 16:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20090626173558.GA402@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=sage@newdream.net \
--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