From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753384Ab2APHWB (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jan 2012 02:22:01 -0500 Received: from mx2.parallels.com ([64.131.90.16]:34563 "EHLO mx2.parallels.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750858Ab2APHV7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jan 2012 02:21:59 -0500 Message-ID: <4F13CFEA.9010406@parallels.com> Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 11:21:14 +0400 From: Glauber Costa User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Miller CC: , , Subject: Re: recvmsg sleeping from invalid context References: <20120113182401.GA25885@redhat.com> <20120113.102712.600185688659703015.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20120113.102712.600185688659703015.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/13/2012 10:27 PM, David Miller wrote: > From: Dave Jones > Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 13:24:01 -0500 > >> getting a ton of these on the latest head (099469502f62fbe0d7e4f0b83a2f22538367f734) >> >> BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at mm/memory.c:3905 >> in_atomic(): 0, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 1067, name: NetworkManager >> INFO: lockdep is turned off. >> Pid: 1067, comm: NetworkManager Not tainted 3.2.0+ #22 >> Call Trace: >> [] __might_sleep+0x145/0x200 >> [] might_fault+0x34/0xb0 >> [] ? sock_def_readable+0x25/0x1a0 >> [] put_cmsg+0x77/0x120 >> [] netlink_recvmsg+0x35c/0x480 >> [] ? sock_update_classid+0x9a/0x260 >> [] ? sock_update_classid+0xd2/0x260 >> [] sock_recvmsg+0x11d/0x140 >> [] ? might_fault+0x53/0xb0 >> [] ? might_fault+0x9c/0xb0 >> [] ? might_fault+0x53/0xb0 >> [] __sys_recvmsg+0x153/0x2d0 >> [] ? fget_light+0x5a/0x470 >> [] ? get_parent_ip+0x11/0x50 >> [] ? sub_preempt_count+0x9d/0xd0 >> [] ? fget_light+0xfb/0x470 >> [] ? fget_light+0x5a/0x470 >> [] sys_recvmsg+0x49/0x90 >> [] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b > > Sigh, I suspect the new socket memcg code, which I didn't want to > even apply in the first place. :-/ > > Glauber, please fix this. I really don't see how this can be related to sock memcg at all. Nothing in the stack trace points to it. You probably got this impression by "sock_update_classid", which has a naming similar to the ones I used to update some sockets attributes, but are something else entirely.