From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755971Ab1ALJ0T (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Jan 2011 04:26:19 -0500 Received: from he.sipsolutions.net ([78.46.109.217]:37431 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754709Ab1ALJ0O (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Jan 2011 04:26:14 -0500 Subject: Re: 2.6.37-git5 -- INFO: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected From: Johannes Berg To: Miles Lane Cc: LKML , Thomas Gleixner , "John W. Linville" , Dipankar Sarma , "Paul E. McKenney" In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 10:26:53 +0100 Message-ID: <1294824413.3639.17.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 15:10 -0500, Miles Lane wrote: > [ INFO: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected ] > 2.6.37-git5 #1 > --------------------------------------------------------- > dbus-daemon/1512 just changed the state of lock: > (&(&list->lock)->rlock#7){+.-...}, at: [] > ieee80211_rx_handlers+0x36/0x1ae3 [mac80211] > but this lock was taken by another, HARDIRQ-safe lock in the past: > (&(&priv->lock)->rlock){-.-...} > > and interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them. Thanks Miles. I'm not sure I fully understand this trace, but I think you can probably easily reproduce it. Would you be willing to test with the patch on this email? I think it's related: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/62842/focus=62848 johannes