Received: by 2002:a5b:505:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o5csp1075153ybp; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 08:29:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwlrm0V7dQ5zRWZ6PFSY1IekItUhoGaV8WR3J017Ym12MVjdIrt7hbyFDawhbSz9z/I/iK4 X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:7cc:: with SMTP id u12mr3526524edy.63.1570634947538; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 08:29:07 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1570634947; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=G5pji3RZNSxvi6v3k/DglaMu0owPlIDC03Twv6HNJPhNLLkpIF3dI7KWOAwu9v8dxX f4N29A0p9nvtkPH/qJh4zYN4C6vQIkrarV4MAm1wQsUcuykwt14HOvhbSVVCtvQWBxzr /+OmkKML+NPxuhxMPO/IGC9GLxjZd0FY4immlc/4bHeyOBbwXeA1tNJNtEfnBjSpuWBw 1wTVhb4a4xM5a8EMU+5EP0+Dj0Ycr2XOoQbqkKM3osMq4LZE7y4pfnxkZc+1LRhEMWhP fk4hqrOS6gmNZBWl7xQ45Jaq8l4iuELcuRvBxxxtKE0w8zM2fIMV9YR4WE1HiiMVG7/a V6Sw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject:message-id :dkim-signature; bh=mASLNb/DzBMnYCk/BVkaomoauovjvnG9Kx9bKHkyDoI=; b=wGZbYE8jB5+4GIkcLKXcrxGpo+mM8tMOJKBsQwNYOLgt0qjLmePNy1g4sBZIkdc2NF h6KtoVlaYcS/PRg1lBVFD6/BoYvCb1t4tg/4lKQcwNX3DxD39V7i+nElub++6Z5o9Djx 94HGZMsnz9RxzMAjFu2IfkmaaRBP561drXu5PN7nAyzCbwKxh65IX66xy7NzwbWL27xz OVs4dLxZQugXId7PoG9zVMz6B98T4Q7L7D/Vrg9sxtjUmiHhixoJ6UoId7duzwuIO3OG 9nVYoCNnxWw8N0xfSorNgFNBO8GY4qTsm6vy7IRE6uZuuJBqPy3OVAix2UlAYlr4KJDU W2jw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@lca.pw header.s=google header.b=DXNsQyTp; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id p15si1400447ejx.56.2019.10.09.08.28.44; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 08:29:07 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@lca.pw header.s=google header.b=DXNsQyTp; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731567AbfJIPZn (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 9 Oct 2019 11:25:43 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-f195.google.com ([209.85.160.195]:39015 "EHLO mail-qt1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729471AbfJIPZn (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Oct 2019 11:25:43 -0400 Received: by mail-qt1-f195.google.com with SMTP id n7so3977526qtb.6 for ; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 08:25:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lca.pw; s=google; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mASLNb/DzBMnYCk/BVkaomoauovjvnG9Kx9bKHkyDoI=; b=DXNsQyTptNLoOznPXTPe5neTJw23vokphUdG5j4/OW6dCq/JLR6wGuRE/sG+v6kLib 5PWyWpqdjVQulOqJtsNQygbPf5upOtr5Ds2DvsrVPglKiBI88hos5lL6LbuAbEUZy08W BdM9IyveLD7FDMcoEuqiOl4LynIM8ZWMGN3tJa1RBhTm36UnM7MC+t7Xqc39xoYoJnEs 4dLwvjerKSVR1XB4JECAAsUte9t9rLkxwvizRNlQ+ylBScJYug+LdNpJvFvDsmDZHcMT DANwTbNra7CZ1zJC5iRY4MxvOqYkr1eRYBs3W3f7YnppL/sSgADL2ZgcQW9/9zeW/IOn k7Og== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mASLNb/DzBMnYCk/BVkaomoauovjvnG9Kx9bKHkyDoI=; b=llHxqWoCwKpPy7V3aY7rmDfW9kBn4eFM/DJl0pELQSpIaGjR16sISXWSPjFGxTxYhK BxzSWeN2XWAakoeAwAPGDZxSi0EKdSm2LY9bMpAiqdUC1mCw7eCv/wdP+Y1oufoUWQta rI/yifIEMlDxyAJybbpmT/TTpYubI53ObchCA3mhpqSa01uUzs8LV7v5C2Fjl+G3md+T uaYXRmL7m9yWAnbOERtCd34OYDWi2c/VebrFwZnLeKCkSi46+RkadKk0BdwBFIAD6Kie msRnnJwaRGgkRU5k6vXtPqGAZEYBRiZ2MdNIYkKYPWApbX3NcKxeCIcs7rH+04B/ViV/ VbuA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX+EcnXCp03QV4hordavzsnbrneM6vktDQJS4wp9LHdU9+wDIOL 2Bzsr1hg6Mc0ODhNT4qO7KyUyg== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:35bc:: with SMTP id k57mr4311381qtb.245.1570634741127; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 08:25:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp-41-57.bos.redhat.com (nat-pool-bos-t.redhat.com. [66.187.233.206]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a4sm1131289qkf.91.2019.10.09.08.25.39 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 09 Oct 2019 08:25:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1570634738.5937.12.camel@lca.pw> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/page_isolation: fix a deadlock with printk() From: Qian Cai To: Peter Oberparleiter , Christian Borntraeger , Michal Hocko , Petr Mladek Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, peterz@infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, john.ogness@linutronix.de, david@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 11:25:38 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1157b3ae-006e-5b8e-71f0-883918992ecc@linux.ibm.com> References: <1570228005-24979-1-git-send-email-cai@lca.pw> <20191007143002.l37bt2lzqtnqjqxu@pathway.suse.cz> <20191007144937.GO2381@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20191008074357.f33f6pbs4cw5majk@pathway.suse.cz> <20191008082752.GB6681@dhcp22.suse.cz> <1570550917.5576.303.camel@lca.pw> <1157b3ae-006e-5b8e-71f0-883918992ecc@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.6 (3.22.6-10.el7) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2019-10-09 at 15:56 +0200, Peter Oberparleiter wrote: > On 08.10.2019 18:08, Qian Cai wrote: > > On Tue, 2019-10-08 at 14:56 +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > > > Adding Peter Oberparleiter. > > > Peter, can you have a look? > > > > > > On 08.10.19 10:27, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > On Tue 08-10-19 09:43:57, Petr Mladek wrote: > > > > > On Mon 2019-10-07 16:49:37, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > [Cc s390 maintainers - the lockdep is http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1570228005-24979-1-git-send-email-cai@lca.pw > > > > > > Petr has explained it is a false positive > > > > > > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20191007143002.l37bt2lzqtnqjqxu@pathway.suse.cz] > > > > > > On Mon 07-10-19 16:30:02, Petr Mladek wrote: > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > I believe that it cannot really happen because: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > static int __init > > > > > > > sclp_console_init(void) > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > rc = sclp_rw_init(); > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > register_console(&sclp_console); > > > > > > > return 0; > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sclp_rw_init() is called before register_console(). And > > > > > > > console_unlock() will never call sclp_console_write() before > > > > > > > the console is registered. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > AFAIK, lockdep only compares existing chain of locks. It does > > > > > > > not know about console registration that would make some > > > > > > > code paths mutually exclusive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe that it is a false positive. I do not know how to > > > > > > > avoid this lockdep report. I hope that it will disappear > > > > > > > by deferring all printk() calls rather soon. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for looking into this Petr. I have also checked the code > > > > > > and I really fail to see why the allocation has to be done under the > > > > > > lock in the first place. sclp_read_sccb and sclp_init_sccb are global > > > > > > variables but I strongly suspect that they need a synchronization during > > > > > > early init, callbacks are registered only later IIUC: > > > > > > > > > > Good idea. It would work when the init function is called only once. > > > > > But see below. > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/s390/char/sclp.c b/drivers/s390/char/sclp.c > > > > > > index d2ab3f07c008..4b1c033e3255 100644 > > > > > > --- a/drivers/s390/char/sclp.c > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/s390/char/sclp.c > > > > > > @@ -1169,13 +1169,13 @@ sclp_init(void) > > > > > > unsigned long flags; > > > > > > int rc = 0; > > > > > > > > > > > > + sclp_read_sccb = (void *) __get_free_page(GFP_ATOMIC | GFP_DMA); > > > > > > + sclp_init_sccb = (void *) __get_free_page(GFP_ATOMIC | GFP_DMA); > > > > > > spin_lock_irqsave(&sclp_lock, flags); > > > > > > /* Check for previous or running initialization */ > > > > > > if (sclp_init_state != sclp_init_state_uninitialized) > > > > > > goto fail_unlock; > > > > > > > > > > It seems that sclp_init() could be called several times in parallel. > > > > > I see it called from sclp_register() and sclp_initcall(). > > > > > > > > Interesting. Something for s390 people to answer I guess. > > > > Anyway, this should be quite trivial to workaround by a cmpxch or alike. > > > > > > > > The above fix is simply insufficient, > > > > 00: [    3.654307] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected        > > 00: [    3.654309] 5.4.0-rc1-next-20191004+ #4 Not tainted                       > > 00: [    3.654311] ------------------------------------------------------        > > 00: [    3.654313] swapper/0/1 is trying to acquire lock:                        > > 00: [    3.654314] 00000000553f3fb8 (sclp_lock){-.-.}, at: sclp_add_request+0x34 > > 00: /0x308                                                                       > > 00: [    3.654320]                                                               > > 00: [    3.654322] but task is already holding lock:                             > > 00: [    3.654323] 00000000550c9fc0 (console_owner){....}, at: console_unlock+0x > > 00: 328/0xa30                                                                    > > 00: [    3.654329]                                                               > > 00: [    3.654331] which lock already depends on the new lock.                  > > I can confirm that both this lockdep warning as well as the original one > are both false positives: lockdep warns that code in sclp_init could > trigger a deadlock via the chain > > sclp_lock --> &(&zone->lock)->rlock --> console_owner > > but > > a) before sclp_init successfully completes, register_console is not > called, so there is no connection between console_owner -> sclp_lock > b) after sclp_init completed, it won't be called again, so any > dependency that requires a call-chain including sclp_init is > impossible to achieve > > Apparently lockdep cannot determine that sclp_init won't be called again. > I'm attaching a patch that moves sclp_init to __init so that lockdep has > a chance of knowing that the function will be gone after init. > > This patch is intended for testing only though, to see if there are other > paths to similar possible deadlocks. I still need to decide if its worth > changing the code to remove false positives in lockdep. > > A generic solution would be preferable from my point of view though, > because otherwise each console driver owner would need to ensure that any > lock taken in their console.write implementation is never held while > memory is allocated/released. > > diff --git a/drivers/s390/char/sclp.c b/drivers/s390/char/sclp.c > index d2ab3f07c008..13219e43d488 100644 > --- a/drivers/s390/char/sclp.c > +++ b/drivers/s390/char/sclp.c > @@ -140,7 +140,6 @@ static void sclp_request_timeout(bool force_restart); > static void sclp_process_queue(void); > static void __sclp_make_read_req(void); > static int sclp_init_mask(int calculate); > -static int sclp_init(void); > > static void > __sclp_queue_read_req(void) > @@ -670,7 +669,8 @@ __sclp_get_mask(sccb_mask_t *receive_mask, sccb_mask_t *send_mask) > } > } > > -/* Register event listener. Return 0 on success, non-zero otherwise. */ > +/* Register event listener. Return 0 on success, non-zero otherwise. Early > + * callers (<= arch_initcall) must call sclp_init() first. */ > int > sclp_register(struct sclp_register *reg) > { > @@ -679,9 +679,8 @@ sclp_register(struct sclp_register *reg) > sccb_mask_t send_mask; > int rc; > > - rc = sclp_init(); > - if (rc) > - return rc; > + if (sclp_init_state != sclp_init_state_initialized) > + return -EINVAL; > spin_lock_irqsave(&sclp_lock, flags); > /* Check event mask for collisions */ > __sclp_get_mask(&receive_mask, &send_mask); > @@ -1163,8 +1162,7 @@ static struct platform_device *sclp_pdev; > > /* Initialize SCLP driver. Return zero if driver is operational, non-zero > * otherwise. */ > -static int > -sclp_init(void) > +int __init sclp_init(void) > { > unsigned long flags; > int rc = 0; > diff --git a/drivers/s390/char/sclp.h b/drivers/s390/char/sclp.h > index 196333013e54..463660261379 100644 > --- a/drivers/s390/char/sclp.h > +++ b/drivers/s390/char/sclp.h > @@ -296,6 +296,7 @@ struct sclp_register { > }; > > /* externals from sclp.c */ > +int __init sclp_init(void); > int sclp_add_request(struct sclp_req *req); > void sclp_sync_wait(void); > int sclp_register(struct sclp_register *reg); > diff --git a/drivers/s390/char/sclp_con.c b/drivers/s390/char/sclp_con.c > index 8966a1c1b548..a08ef2c8379e 100644 > --- a/drivers/s390/char/sclp_con.c > +++ b/drivers/s390/char/sclp_con.c > @@ -319,6 +319,9 @@ sclp_console_init(void) > /* SCLP consoles are handled together */ > if (!(CONSOLE_IS_SCLP || CONSOLE_IS_VT220)) > return 0; > + rc = sclp_init(); > + if (rc) > + return rc; > rc = sclp_rw_init(); > if (rc) > return rc; > diff --git a/drivers/s390/char/sclp_vt220.c b/drivers/s390/char/sclp_vt220.c > index 3f9a6ef650fa..28b23e22248b 100644 > --- a/drivers/s390/char/sclp_vt220.c > +++ b/drivers/s390/char/sclp_vt220.c > @@ -694,6 +694,11 @@ static int __init __sclp_vt220_init(int num_pages) > sclp_vt220_init_count++; > if (sclp_vt220_init_count != 1) > return 0; > + rc = sclp_init(); > + if (rc) { > + sclp_vt220_init_count--; > + return rc; > + } > spin_lock_init(&sclp_vt220_lock); > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&sclp_vt220_empty); > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&sclp_vt220_outqueue); Unfortunately, the patch does not help here. I guess the lockdep does not really differential __init or not because those places can still have a chance to deadlock in general after interrupt and preempt are enabled even during the boot but it is just not the case here. 00: [    2.812088] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected        00: [    2.812090] 5.4.0-rc2-next-20191009+ #4 Not tainted                       00: [    2.812092] ------------------------------------------------------        00: [    2.812094] swapper/0/1 is trying to acquire lock:                        00: [    2.812095] 0000000036a07ed8 (sclp_lock){-.-.}, at: sclp_add_request+0x34 00: /0x308                                                                       00: [    2.812102]                                                               00: [    2.812103] but task is already holding lock:                             00: [    2.812105] 00000000366d9ec0 (console_owner){....}, at: console_unlock+0x 00: 328/0xa30                                                                    00: [    2.812111]                                                               00: [    2.812113] which lock already depends on the new lock.                   00: [    2.812114]                                                               00: [    2.812115]                                                               00: [    2.812117] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:          00: [    2.812118]                                                               00: [    2.812120] -> #2 (console_owner){....}:                                  00: [    2.812126]        lock_acquire+0x21a/0x468                               00: [    2.812127]        console_unlock+0x3a6/0xa30                             00: [    2.812129]        vprintk_emit+0x184/0x3c8                               00: [    2.812131]        vprintk_default+0x44/0x50                              00: [    2.812132]        printk+0xa8/0xc0                                       00: [    2.812134]        get_random_u64+0x40/0x108                              00: [    2.812135]        add_to_free_area_random+0x188/0x1c0                    00: [    2.812137]        free_one_page+0x72/0x128                               00: [    2.812139]        __free_pages_ok+0x51c/0xc90                            00: [    2.812141]        memblock_free_all+0x30a/0x3b0                          00: [    2.812142]        mem_init+0x84/0x200                                    00: [    2.812144]        start_kernel+0x384/0x6a0                               00: [    2.812145]        startup_continue+0x70/0xd0                             00: [    2.812146]                                                               00: [    2.812147] -> #1 (&(&zone->lock)->rlock){....}:                          00: [    2.812154]        lock_acquire+0x21a/0x468                               00: [    2.812155]        _raw_spin_lock+0x54/0x68                               00: [    2.812157]        get_page_from_freelist+0x8b6/0x2d28                    00: [    2.812159]        __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x246/0x658                     00: [    2.812161]        __get_free_pages+0x34/0x78                             00: [    2.812162]        sclp_init+0xce/0x640                                   00: [    2.812164]        sclp_console_init+0x4e/0x1c0                           00: [    2.812166]        console_init+0x2c8/0x410                               00: [    2.812168]        start_kernel+0x530/0x6a0                               00: [    2.812169]        startup_continue+0x70/0xd0                             00: [    2.812170]                                                               00: [    2.812171] -> #0 (sclp_lock){-.-.}:                                      00: [    2.812177]        check_noncircular+0x338/0x3e0                          00: [    2.812179]        __lock_acquire+0x1e66/0x2d88                           00: [    2.812181]        lock_acquire+0x21a/0x468                               00: [    2.812182]        _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0xcc/0xe8                       00: [    2.812184]        sclp_add_request+0x34/0x308                            00: [    2.812186]        sclp_conbuf_emit+0x100/0x138                           00: [    2.812187]        sclp_console_write+0x96/0x3b8                          00: [    2.812189]        console_unlock+0x6dc/0xa30                             00: [    2.812191]        vprintk_emit+0x184/0x3c8                               00: [    2.812192]        vprintk_default+0x44/0x50                              00: [    2.812194]        printk+0xa8/0xc0                                       00: [    2.812196]        iommu_debugfs_setup+0xf2/0x108                         00: [    2.812198]        iommu_init+0x6c/0x78                                   00: [    2.812200]        do_one_initcall+0x162/0x680                            00: [    2.812201]        kernel_init_freeable+0x4e8/0x5a8                       00: [    2.812203]        kernel_init+0x2a/0x188                                 00: [    2.812205]        ret_from_fork+0x30/0x34                                00: [    2.812206]        kernel_thread_starter+0x0/0xc                          00: [    2.812207]                                                               00: [    2.812209] other info that might help us debug this:                     00: [    2.812210]                                                               00: [    2.812211] Chain exists of:                                              00: [    2.812212]   sclp_lock --> &(&zone->lock)->rlock --> console_owner       00: [    2.812221]                                                               00: [    2.812222]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:                            00: [    2.812223]                                                               00: [    2.812225]        CPU0                    CPU1                           00: [    2.812227]        ----                    ----                           00: [    2.812228]   lock(console_owner);                                        00: [    2.812232]                                lock(&(&zone->lock)->rlock);   00: [    2.812236]                                lock(console_owner);           00: [    2.812239]   lock(sclp_lock);                                            00: [    2.812243]                                                               00: [    2.812244]  *** DEADLOCK ***                                             00: [    2.812245]                                                               00: [    2.812247] 2 locks held by swapper/0/1:                                  00: [    2.812248]  #0: 00000000366da100 (console_lock){+.+.}, at: vprintk_emit+ 00: 0x178/0x3c8                                                                  00: [    2.812255]  #1: 00000000366d9ec0 (console_owner){....}, at: console_unlo 00: ck+0x328/0xa30                                                               00: [    2.812262]                                                               00: [    2.812264] stack backtrace:                                              00: [    2.812266] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.4.0-rc2-next-2019 00: 1009+ #4                                                                     00: [    2.812268] Hardware name: IBM 2964 N96 400 (z/VM 6.4.0)                  00: [    2.812269] Call Trace:                                                   00: [    2.812271] ([<000000003591e230>] show_stack+0x110/0x1b0)                 00: [    2.812273]  [<00000000361e025e>] dump_stack+0x126/0x178                  00: [    2.812276]  [<0000000035a149b8>] check_noncircular+0x338/0x3e0           00: [    2.812277]  [<0000000035a1a9a6>] __lock_acquire+0x1e66/0x2d88            00: [    2.812279]  [<0000000035a17cc2>] lock_acquire+0x21a/0x468                00: [    2.812281]  [<000000003621bce4>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0xcc/0xe8        00: [    2.812283]  [<0000000035ff534c>] sclp_add_request+0x34/0x308             00: [    2.812285]  [<0000000035ffc6b8>] sclp_conbuf_emit+0x100/0x138            00: [    2.812287]  [<0000000035ffc7d6>] sclp_console_write+0x96/0x3b8           00: [    2.812289]  [<0000000035a2b4fc>] console_unlock+0x6dc/0xa30              00: [    2.812291]  [<0000000035a2dd0c>] vprintk_emit+0x184/0x3c8                00: [    2.812293]  [<0000000035a2df94>] vprintk_default+0x44/0x50               00: [    2.812295]  [<0000000035a2ea40>] printk+0xa8/0xc0                        00: [    2.812297]  [<0000000035f4e5ea>] iommu_debugfs_setup+0xf2/0x108          00: [    2.812299]  [<0000000036b90554>] iommu_init+0x6c/0x78                    00: [    2.812301]  [<0000000035900fda>] do_one_initcall+0x162/0x680             00: [    2.812303]  [<0000000036b4f9f0>] kernel_init_freeable+0x4e8/0x5a8        00: [    2.812305]  [<0000000036206bda>] kernel_init+0x2a/0x188                  00: [    2.812306]  [<000000003621cfdc>] ret_from_fork+0x30/0x34                 00: [    2.812308]  [<000000003621cfe0>] kernel_thread_starter+0x0/0xc           00: [    2.812310] INFO: lockdep is turned off.