* v2.6.25: WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2437 __lock_acquire+0xc69/0xfa0() @ 2008-04-20 10:29 Vegard Nossum 2008-04-21 12:48 ` Peter Zijlstra 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Vegard Nossum @ 2008-04-20 10:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: LKML; +Cc: Tejun Heo, Jeff Garzik, Ingo Molnar Hi, This appears in clean v2.6.25: ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2437 __lock_acquire+0xc69/0xfa0() Pid: 1002, comm: scsi_eh_4 Not tainted 2.6.25 #379 [<c011bb5c>] warn_on_slowpath+0x3c/0x50 [<c013b0f9>] ? __lock_acquire+0x219/0xfa0 [<c013b0f9>] ? __lock_acquire+0x219/0xfa0 [<c012c2c8>] ? __kernel_text_address+0x8/0x20 [<c0104fce>] ? dump_trace+0xce/0x120 [<c010a56c>] ? save_stack_trace+0x1c/0x40 [<c0138659>] ? save_trace+0x39/0xa0 [<c013a3d1>] ? mark_lock+0x61/0x540 [<c013bb49>] __lock_acquire+0xc69/0xfa0 [<c012b46a>] ? __cancel_work_timer+0x5a/0x140 [<c01082ac>] ? native_sched_clock+0x5c/0xb0 [<c013beee>] lock_acquire+0x6e/0x90 [<c02a8e23>] ? ata_scsi_error+0x33/0x6a0 [<c02e4946>] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x26/0x60 [<c02a8e23>] ? ata_scsi_error+0x33/0x6a0 [<c02a4ee0>] ? ata_bmdma_error_handler+0x0/0x50 [<c02a8e23>] ata_scsi_error+0x33/0x6a0 [<c02e249a>] ? schedule+0x27a/0x410 [<c0256dd1>] ? __scsi_iterate_devices+0x51/0x70 [<c025c681>] ? scsi_run_host_queues+0x21/0x30 [<c025ae5e>] scsi_error_handler+0x9e/0x4e0 [<c02e249a>] ? schedule+0x27a/0x410 [<c025adc0>] ? scsi_error_handler+0x0/0x4e0 [<c012dd86>] kthread+0x36/0x60 [<c012dd50>] ? kthread+0x0/0x60 [<c0104c27>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10 ======================= ---[ end trace 5e5d737e76fd4940 ]--- Full log and config: http://folk.uio.no/vegardno/linux/log-20080420.txt http://folk.uio.no/vegardno/linux/config-20080420.txt (The bootup is from qemu for the ease of harvesting the log -- but it happens on real hardware too!) Vegard -- "The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation." -- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: v2.6.25: WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2437 __lock_acquire+0xc69/0xfa0() 2008-04-20 10:29 v2.6.25: WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2437 __lock_acquire+0xc69/0xfa0() Vegard Nossum @ 2008-04-21 12:48 ` Peter Zijlstra 2008-04-24 3:01 ` Tejun Heo 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Peter Zijlstra @ 2008-04-21 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vegard Nossum; +Cc: LKML, Tejun Heo, Jeff Garzik, Ingo Molnar On Sun, 2008-04-20 at 12:29 +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote: > Hi, > > This appears in clean v2.6.25: > > ------------[ cut here ]------------ > WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2437 __lock_acquire+0xc69/0xfa0() > Pid: 1002, comm: scsi_eh_4 Not tainted 2.6.25 #379 > [<c011bb5c>] warn_on_slowpath+0x3c/0x50 > [<c013b0f9>] ? __lock_acquire+0x219/0xfa0 > [<c013b0f9>] ? __lock_acquire+0x219/0xfa0 > [<c012c2c8>] ? __kernel_text_address+0x8/0x20 > [<c0104fce>] ? dump_trace+0xce/0x120 > [<c010a56c>] ? save_stack_trace+0x1c/0x40 > [<c0138659>] ? save_trace+0x39/0xa0 > [<c013a3d1>] ? mark_lock+0x61/0x540 > [<c013bb49>] __lock_acquire+0xc69/0xfa0 > [<c012b46a>] ? __cancel_work_timer+0x5a/0x140 > [<c01082ac>] ? native_sched_clock+0x5c/0xb0 > [<c013beee>] lock_acquire+0x6e/0x90 > [<c02a8e23>] ? ata_scsi_error+0x33/0x6a0 > [<c02e4946>] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x26/0x60 > [<c02a8e23>] ? ata_scsi_error+0x33/0x6a0 > [<c02a4ee0>] ? ata_bmdma_error_handler+0x0/0x50 > [<c02a8e23>] ata_scsi_error+0x33/0x6a0 > [<c02e249a>] ? schedule+0x27a/0x410 > [<c0256dd1>] ? __scsi_iterate_devices+0x51/0x70 > [<c025c681>] ? scsi_run_host_queues+0x21/0x30 > [<c025ae5e>] scsi_error_handler+0x9e/0x4e0 > [<c02e249a>] ? schedule+0x27a/0x410 > [<c025adc0>] ? scsi_error_handler+0x0/0x4e0 > [<c012dd86>] kthread+0x36/0x60 > [<c012dd50>] ? kthread+0x0/0x60 > [<c0104c27>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10 > ======================= > ---[ end trace 5e5d737e76fd4940 ]--- Indeed, quite easy to reproduce: diff --git a/kernel/lockdep.c b/kernel/lockdep.c index 81a4e4a..33901ef 100644 --- a/kernel/lockdep.c +++ b/kernel/lockdep.c @@ -2434,6 +2434,13 @@ static int __lock_acquire(struct lockdep_map *lock, unsigned int subclass, * the hash, not class->key. */ id = class - lock_classes; + if (id >= MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS) { + spinlock_t *slock = container_of(lock, spinlock_t, dep_map); + + printk(KERN_EMERG "magic: %x\n", slock->magic); + printk(KERN_EMERG "class: %p\n", class); + printk(KERN_EMERG "id: %u\n", id); + } if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(id >= MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS)) return 0; gives me: ata3: PATA max PIO4 cmd 0x1e8 ctl 0x3ee irq 11 magic: c050cf60 class: c7c20e54 id: 2265185251 ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: at /mnt/md0/src/linux-2.6-2/kernel/lockdep.c:2444 __lock_acquire+0x57b/0xfd0() Looks like someone is stomping on the spinlock or just passing us garbage. ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: v2.6.25: WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2437 __lock_acquire+0xc69/0xfa0() 2008-04-21 12:48 ` Peter Zijlstra @ 2008-04-24 3:01 ` Tejun Heo 2009-04-11 16:10 ` Jeff Garzik 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Tejun Heo @ 2008-04-24 3:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Vegard Nossum, LKML, Jeff Garzik, Ingo Molnar, IDE/ATA development list, Alan Cox [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2564 bytes --] Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Sun, 2008-04-20 at 12:29 +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This appears in clean v2.6.25: >> >> ------------[ cut here ]------------ >> WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2437 __lock_acquire+0xc69/0xfa0() >> Pid: 1002, comm: scsi_eh_4 Not tainted 2.6.25 #379 >> [<c011bb5c>] warn_on_slowpath+0x3c/0x50 >> [<c013b0f9>] ? __lock_acquire+0x219/0xfa0 >> [<c013b0f9>] ? __lock_acquire+0x219/0xfa0 >> [<c012c2c8>] ? __kernel_text_address+0x8/0x20 >> [<c0104fce>] ? dump_trace+0xce/0x120 >> [<c010a56c>] ? save_stack_trace+0x1c/0x40 >> [<c0138659>] ? save_trace+0x39/0xa0 >> [<c013a3d1>] ? mark_lock+0x61/0x540 >> [<c013bb49>] __lock_acquire+0xc69/0xfa0 >> [<c012b46a>] ? __cancel_work_timer+0x5a/0x140 >> [<c01082ac>] ? native_sched_clock+0x5c/0xb0 >> [<c013beee>] lock_acquire+0x6e/0x90 >> [<c02a8e23>] ? ata_scsi_error+0x33/0x6a0 >> [<c02e4946>] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x26/0x60 >> [<c02a8e23>] ? ata_scsi_error+0x33/0x6a0 >> [<c02a4ee0>] ? ata_bmdma_error_handler+0x0/0x50 >> [<c02a8e23>] ata_scsi_error+0x33/0x6a0 >> [<c02e249a>] ? schedule+0x27a/0x410 >> [<c0256dd1>] ? __scsi_iterate_devices+0x51/0x70 >> [<c025c681>] ? scsi_run_host_queues+0x21/0x30 >> [<c025ae5e>] scsi_error_handler+0x9e/0x4e0 >> [<c02e249a>] ? schedule+0x27a/0x410 >> [<c025adc0>] ? scsi_error_handler+0x0/0x4e0 >> [<c012dd86>] kthread+0x36/0x60 >> [<c012dd50>] ? kthread+0x0/0x60 >> [<c0104c27>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10 >> ======================= >> ---[ end trace 5e5d737e76fd4940 ]--- > > Indeed, quite easy to reproduce: > > diff --git a/kernel/lockdep.c b/kernel/lockdep.c > index 81a4e4a..33901ef 100644 > --- a/kernel/lockdep.c > +++ b/kernel/lockdep.c > @@ -2434,6 +2434,13 @@ static int __lock_acquire(struct lockdep_map *lock, unsigned int subclass, > * the hash, not class->key. > */ > id = class - lock_classes; > + if (id >= MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS) { > + spinlock_t *slock = container_of(lock, spinlock_t, dep_map); > + > + printk(KERN_EMERG "magic: %x\n", slock->magic); > + printk(KERN_EMERG "class: %p\n", class); > + printk(KERN_EMERG "id: %u\n", id); > + } > if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(id >= MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS)) > return 0; > > > > gives me: > > ata3: PATA max PIO4 cmd 0x1e8 ctl 0x3ee irq 11 > magic: c050cf60 > class: c7c20e54 > id: 2265185251 > ------------[ cut here ]------------ > WARNING: at /mnt/md0/src/linux-2.6-2/kernel/lockdep.c:2444 > __lock_acquire+0x57b/0xfd0() > > > Looks like someone is stomping on the spinlock or just passing us > garbage. Does the attached patch help? -- tejun [-- Attachment #2: legacy-fix.patch --] [-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 350 bytes --] diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_legacy.c b/drivers/ata/pata_legacy.c index 7af4b29..f7ba234 100644 --- a/drivers/ata/pata_legacy.c +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_legacy.c @@ -1037,6 +1037,7 @@ static __init int legacy_init_one(struct legacy_probe *probe) return 0; } } + ata_host_detach(host); fail: platform_device_unregister(pdev); return ret; ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: v2.6.25: WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2437 __lock_acquire+0xc69/0xfa0() 2008-04-24 3:01 ` Tejun Heo @ 2009-04-11 16:10 ` Jeff Garzik 2009-04-12 18:11 ` Tejun Heo 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Jeff Garzik @ 2009-04-11 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tejun Heo Cc: Peter Zijlstra, Vegard Nossum, LKML, Ingo Molnar, IDE/ATA development list, Alan Cox Tejun Heo wrote: > Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> Indeed, quite easy to reproduce: >> >> diff --git a/kernel/lockdep.c b/kernel/lockdep.c >> index 81a4e4a..33901ef 100644 >> --- a/kernel/lockdep.c >> +++ b/kernel/lockdep.c >> @@ -2434,6 +2434,13 @@ static int __lock_acquire(struct lockdep_map >> *lock, unsigned int subclass, >> * the hash, not class->key. >> */ >> id = class - lock_classes; >> + if (id >= MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS) { >> + spinlock_t *slock = container_of(lock, spinlock_t, dep_map); >> + >> + printk(KERN_EMERG "magic: %x\n", slock->magic); >> + printk(KERN_EMERG "class: %p\n", class); >> + printk(KERN_EMERG "id: %u\n", id); >> + } >> if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(id >= MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS)) >> return 0; >> >> >> >> gives me: >> >> ata3: PATA max PIO4 cmd 0x1e8 ctl 0x3ee irq 11 >> magic: c050cf60 >> class: c7c20e54 >> id: 2265185251 >> ------------[ cut here ]------------ >> WARNING: at /mnt/md0/src/linux-2.6-2/kernel/lockdep.c:2444 >> __lock_acquire+0x57b/0xfd0() >> >> >> Looks like someone is stomping on the spinlock or just passing us >> garbage. > > Does the attached patch help? > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_legacy.c b/drivers/ata/pata_legacy.c > index 7af4b29..f7ba234 100644 > --- a/drivers/ata/pata_legacy.c > +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_legacy.c > @@ -1037,6 +1037,7 @@ static __init int legacy_init_one(struct legacy_probe *probe) > return 0; > } > } > + ata_host_detach(host); > fail: > platform_device_unregister(pdev); > return ret; (going through old, unresolved email) It looks like this might still be needed? I never saw an "it works" response to this email. Jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: v2.6.25: WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2437 __lock_acquire+0xc69/0xfa0() 2009-04-11 16:10 ` Jeff Garzik @ 2009-04-12 18:11 ` Tejun Heo 2009-04-14 3:59 ` [PATCH #upstream-fixes] pata_legacy: fix no device fail path Tejun Heo 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Tejun Heo @ 2009-04-12 18:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeff Garzik Cc: Peter Zijlstra, Vegard Nossum, LKML, Ingo Molnar, IDE/ATA development list, Alan Cox Jeff Garzik wrote: > (going through old, unresolved email) > > It looks like this might still be needed? I never saw an "it works" > response to this email. Indeed. Peter Zijlstra, can you please test it? -- tejun ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [PATCH #upstream-fixes] pata_legacy: fix no device fail path 2009-04-12 18:11 ` Tejun Heo @ 2009-04-14 3:59 ` Tejun Heo 2009-04-16 19:23 ` Jeff Garzik 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Tejun Heo @ 2009-04-14 3:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeff Garzik Cc: Peter Zijlstra, Vegard Nossum, LKML, Ingo Molnar, IDE/ATA development list, Alan Cox When pata_legacy can't detect any device, it unregisters the platform_device and fails detection. However, it forgets to detach ata host triggering weird failures as the host later gets freed by devres while still attached. Fix it. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Reported-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> --- Well, with or without test verification, this patch is correct. Thanks. drivers/ata/pata_legacy.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_legacy.c b/drivers/ata/pata_legacy.c index 3f830f0..0c6dde8 100644 --- a/drivers/ata/pata_legacy.c +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_legacy.c @@ -1032,6 +1032,7 @@ static __init int legacy_init_one(struct legacy_probe *probe) return 0; } } + ata_host_detach(host); fail: platform_device_unregister(pdev); return ret; ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] pata_legacy: fix no device fail path 2009-04-14 3:59 ` [PATCH #upstream-fixes] pata_legacy: fix no device fail path Tejun Heo @ 2009-04-16 19:23 ` Jeff Garzik 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Jeff Garzik @ 2009-04-16 19:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tejun Heo Cc: Peter Zijlstra, Vegard Nossum, LKML, Ingo Molnar, IDE/ATA development list, Alan Cox Tejun Heo wrote: > When pata_legacy can't detect any device, it unregisters the > platform_device and fails detection. However, it forgets to detach > ata host triggering weird failures as the host later gets freed by > devres while still attached. Fix it. > > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> > Reported-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> > --- > Well, with or without test verification, this patch is correct. Thanks. > > drivers/ata/pata_legacy.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) applied ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-04-16 19:23 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2008-04-20 10:29 v2.6.25: WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2437 __lock_acquire+0xc69/0xfa0() Vegard Nossum 2008-04-21 12:48 ` Peter Zijlstra 2008-04-24 3:01 ` Tejun Heo 2009-04-11 16:10 ` Jeff Garzik 2009-04-12 18:11 ` Tejun Heo 2009-04-14 3:59 ` [PATCH #upstream-fixes] pata_legacy: fix no device fail path Tejun Heo 2009-04-16 19:23 ` Jeff Garzik
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox