* INFO: possible recursive locking detected: autofs4_expire_indirect()
@ 2011-10-25 12:48 Pawel Sikora
2011-10-27 13:31 ` Nick Bowler
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Pawel Sikora @ 2011-10-25 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel; +Cc: torvalds, viro, raven, arekm
Hi,
the nfs client/server with fresh 3.0.8 + vserver + enabled debug options reports attached info.
afaics, the vserver doesn't change autofs code, so it looks like a pure vanilla problem.
BR,
Paweł.
[ 3708.715749] =============================================
[ 3708.715940] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
[ 3708.716040] 3.0.8-vs2.3.1-dirty #6
[ 3708.716131] ---------------------------------------------
[ 3708.716230] automount/29215 is trying to acquire lock:
[ 3708.716301] (&(&dentry->d_lock)->rlock/1){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
[ 3708.716301]
[ 3708.716301] but task is already holding lock:
[ 3708.716301] (&(&dentry->d_lock)->rlock/1){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
[ 3708.716301]
[ 3708.716301] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 3708.716301] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[ 3708.716301]
[ 3708.716301] CPU0
[ 3708.716301] ----
[ 3708.716301] lock(&(&dentry->d_lock)->rlock);
[ 3708.716301] lock(&(&dentry->d_lock)->rlock);
[ 3708.716301]
[ 3708.716301] *** DEADLOCK ***
[ 3708.716301]
[ 3708.716301] May be due to missing lock nesting notation
[ 3708.716301]
[ 3708.716301] 2 locks held by automount/29215:
[ 3708.716301] #0: (&(&sbi->lookup_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa0214f61>] autofs4_expire_indirect+0x91/0x4e0 [autofs4]
[ 3708.716301] #1: (&(&dentry->d_lock)->rlock/1){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
[ 3708.716301]
[ 3708.716301] stack backtrace:
[ 3708.716301] Pid: 29215, comm: automount Not tainted 3.0.8-vs2.3.1-dirty #6
[ 3708.716301] Call Trace:
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff810925d6>] __lock_acquire+0x1606/0x1b50
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff81092c6a>] ? lock_release_non_nested+0x14a/0x310
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff810930c5>] lock_acquire+0x85/0x110
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa02151bd>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0x2ed/0x4e0 [autofs4]
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff81453c1a>] _raw_spin_lock_nested+0x2a/0x40
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff81454386>] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x26/0x30
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8110f830>] ? might_fault+0x40/0x90
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa021568d>] autofs4_do_expire_multi+0xed/0x130 [autofs4]
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0215a70>] ? autofs_dev_ioctl_askumount+0x30/0x30 [autofs4]
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0215a8a>] autofs_dev_ioctl_expire+0x1a/0x20 [autofs4]
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0216063>] _autofs_dev_ioctl+0x273/0x360 [autofs4]
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa021615e>] autofs_dev_ioctl+0xe/0x20 [autofs4]
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8115dc56>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x96/0x560
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8114c289>] ? fget_light+0x99/0x130
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8114c227>] ? fget_light+0x37/0x130
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8115e1b1>] sys_ioctl+0x91/0xa0
[ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8145bdbb>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: INFO: possible recursive locking detected: autofs4_expire_indirect()
2011-10-25 12:48 INFO: possible recursive locking detected: autofs4_expire_indirect() Pawel Sikora
@ 2011-10-27 13:31 ` Nick Bowler
2011-10-28 6:35 ` Ian Kent
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Nick Bowler @ 2011-10-27 13:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pawel Sikora; +Cc: linux-kernel, torvalds, viro, raven, arekm, Steven Rostedt
On 2011-10-25 14:48 +0200, Pawel Sikora wrote:
> the nfs client/server with fresh 3.0.8 + vserver + enabled debug options reports attached info.
> afaics, the vserver doesn't change autofs code, so it looks like a pure vanilla problem.
I reported this issue a long time ago, and a patch[1] was provided
quickly, but it seems that for some reason it never made it to mainline.
Adding Steven to CC.
[1] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1129741
> [ 3708.715749] =============================================
> [ 3708.715940] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> [ 3708.716040] 3.0.8-vs2.3.1-dirty #6
> [ 3708.716131] ---------------------------------------------
> [ 3708.716230] automount/29215 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 3708.716301] (&(&dentry->d_lock)->rlock/1){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> [ 3708.716301]
> [ 3708.716301] but task is already holding lock:
> [ 3708.716301] (&(&dentry->d_lock)->rlock/1){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> [ 3708.716301]
> [ 3708.716301] other info that might help us debug this:
> [ 3708.716301] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> [ 3708.716301]
> [ 3708.716301] CPU0
> [ 3708.716301] ----
> [ 3708.716301] lock(&(&dentry->d_lock)->rlock);
> [ 3708.716301] lock(&(&dentry->d_lock)->rlock);
> [ 3708.716301]
> [ 3708.716301] *** DEADLOCK ***
> [ 3708.716301]
> [ 3708.716301] May be due to missing lock nesting notation
> [ 3708.716301]
> [ 3708.716301] 2 locks held by automount/29215:
> [ 3708.716301] #0: (&(&sbi->lookup_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa0214f61>] autofs4_expire_indirect+0x91/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> [ 3708.716301] #1: (&(&dentry->d_lock)->rlock/1){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> [ 3708.716301]
> [ 3708.716301] stack backtrace:
> [ 3708.716301] Pid: 29215, comm: automount Not tainted 3.0.8-vs2.3.1-dirty #6
> [ 3708.716301] Call Trace:
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff810925d6>] __lock_acquire+0x1606/0x1b50
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff81092c6a>] ? lock_release_non_nested+0x14a/0x310
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff810930c5>] lock_acquire+0x85/0x110
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa02151bd>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0x2ed/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff81453c1a>] _raw_spin_lock_nested+0x2a/0x40
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff81454386>] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x26/0x30
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8110f830>] ? might_fault+0x40/0x90
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa021568d>] autofs4_do_expire_multi+0xed/0x130 [autofs4]
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0215a70>] ? autofs_dev_ioctl_askumount+0x30/0x30 [autofs4]
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0215a8a>] autofs_dev_ioctl_expire+0x1a/0x20 [autofs4]
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0216063>] _autofs_dev_ioctl+0x273/0x360 [autofs4]
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa021615e>] autofs_dev_ioctl+0xe/0x20 [autofs4]
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8115dc56>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x96/0x560
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8114c289>] ? fget_light+0x99/0x130
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8114c227>] ? fget_light+0x37/0x130
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8115e1b1>] sys_ioctl+0x91/0xa0
> [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8145bdbb>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
Cheers,
--
Nick Bowler, Elliptic Technologies (http://www.elliptictech.com/)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: INFO: possible recursive locking detected: autofs4_expire_indirect()
2011-10-27 13:31 ` Nick Bowler
@ 2011-10-28 6:35 ` Ian Kent
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Ian Kent @ 2011-10-28 6:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nick Bowler
Cc: Pawel Sikora, linux-kernel, torvalds, viro, arekm, Steven Rostedt
On Thu, 2011-10-27 at 09:31 -0400, Nick Bowler wrote:
> On 2011-10-25 14:48 +0200, Pawel Sikora wrote:
> > the nfs client/server with fresh 3.0.8 + vserver + enabled debug options reports attached info.
> > afaics, the vserver doesn't change autofs code, so it looks like a pure vanilla problem.
>
> I reported this issue a long time ago, and a patch[1] was provided
> quickly, but it seems that for some reason it never made it to mainline.
>
> Adding Steven to CC.
>
> [1] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1129741
And when nothing happened I forwarded the patch to Al Viro.
Sounds like it's time to re-post this one, and I'll ack it.
>
> > [ 3708.715749] =============================================
> > [ 3708.715940] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> > [ 3708.716040] 3.0.8-vs2.3.1-dirty #6
> > [ 3708.716131] ---------------------------------------------
> > [ 3708.716230] automount/29215 is trying to acquire lock:
> > [ 3708.716301] (&(&dentry->d_lock)->rlock/1){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> > [ 3708.716301]
> > [ 3708.716301] but task is already holding lock:
> > [ 3708.716301] (&(&dentry->d_lock)->rlock/1){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> > [ 3708.716301]
> > [ 3708.716301] other info that might help us debug this:
> > [ 3708.716301] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> > [ 3708.716301]
> > [ 3708.716301] CPU0
> > [ 3708.716301] ----
> > [ 3708.716301] lock(&(&dentry->d_lock)->rlock);
> > [ 3708.716301] lock(&(&dentry->d_lock)->rlock);
> > [ 3708.716301]
> > [ 3708.716301] *** DEADLOCK ***
> > [ 3708.716301]
> > [ 3708.716301] May be due to missing lock nesting notation
> > [ 3708.716301]
> > [ 3708.716301] 2 locks held by automount/29215:
> > [ 3708.716301] #0: (&(&sbi->lookup_lock)->rlock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa0214f61>] autofs4_expire_indirect+0x91/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> > [ 3708.716301] #1: (&(&dentry->d_lock)->rlock/1){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> > [ 3708.716301]
> > [ 3708.716301] stack backtrace:
> > [ 3708.716301] Pid: 29215, comm: automount Not tainted 3.0.8-vs2.3.1-dirty #6
> > [ 3708.716301] Call Trace:
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff810925d6>] __lock_acquire+0x1606/0x1b50
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff81092c6a>] ? lock_release_non_nested+0x14a/0x310
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff810930c5>] lock_acquire+0x85/0x110
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa02151bd>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0x2ed/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff81453c1a>] _raw_spin_lock_nested+0x2a/0x40
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] ? autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff81454386>] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x26/0x30
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8110f830>] ? might_fault+0x40/0x90
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0214fb0>] autofs4_expire_indirect+0xe0/0x4e0 [autofs4]
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa021568d>] autofs4_do_expire_multi+0xed/0x130 [autofs4]
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0215a70>] ? autofs_dev_ioctl_askumount+0x30/0x30 [autofs4]
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0215a8a>] autofs_dev_ioctl_expire+0x1a/0x20 [autofs4]
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa0216063>] _autofs_dev_ioctl+0x273/0x360 [autofs4]
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffffa021615e>] autofs_dev_ioctl+0xe/0x20 [autofs4]
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8115dc56>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x96/0x560
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8114c289>] ? fget_light+0x99/0x130
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8114c227>] ? fget_light+0x37/0x130
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8115e1b1>] sys_ioctl+0x91/0xa0
> > [ 3708.716301] [<ffffffff8145bdbb>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>
> Cheers,
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-10-28 6:35 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-10-25 12:48 INFO: possible recursive locking detected: autofs4_expire_indirect() Pawel Sikora
2011-10-27 13:31 ` Nick Bowler
2011-10-28 6:35 ` Ian Kent
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).