From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753927Ab0CBWuF (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Mar 2010 17:50:05 -0500 Received: from www.tglx.de ([62.245.132.106]:59607 "EHLO www.tglx.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753737Ab0CBWuB (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Mar 2010 17:50:01 -0500 Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 23:49:43 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Dave Chinner cc: LKML , Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: BUG: spinlock lockup on task_rq_lock in 2.6.33 In-Reply-To: <20100302221729.GG18369@discord.disaster> Message-ID: References: <20100302063132.GF18369@discord.disaster> <20100302221729.GG18369@discord.disaster> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 3 Mar 2010, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 11:08:50AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > Dave, > > > > On Tue, 2 Mar 2010, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > > Hi Folks, > > > > > > I just locked up a machine with the following trace: > > > > > > [ 5247.149256] BUG: spinlock lockup on CPU#1, dd/7018, ffff8800059d4380 > > > [ 5247.150009] BUG: spinlock lockup on CPU#0, dd/6211, ffff8800059d4380 > > > [ 5247.150009] Pid: 6211, comm: dd Not tainted 2.6.33-dgc #86 > > > [ 5247.150009] Call Trace: > > > [ 5247.150009] [] do_raw_spin_lock+0x160/0x170 > > > [ 5247.150009] [] _raw_spin_lock+0x56/0x70 > > > [ 5247.150009] [] ? task_rq_lock+0x52/0x90 > > > [ 5247.150009] [] task_rq_lock+0x52/0x90 > > > [ 5247.150009] [] try_to_wake_up+0x40/0x3d0 > > > [ 5247.150009] [] wake_up_process+0x15/0x20 > > > > I can't say it for sure, but that might be related to a problem with > > TASK_WAKING which we discovered recently. The fix is in linus tree > > (commit 0970d2992dfd7d5ec2c787417cf464f01eeaf42a) and on the way to stable. > > Thanks Thomas - I'll pull that commit in and see if it has any > effect on the problems I'm seeing. I have a hard time to see how that might lead to a deadlock, but hell, that load balancing code is a maze. Thanks, tglx