Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754819Ab0AZSYZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:24:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754646Ab0AZSYX (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:24:23 -0500 Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:57600 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754790Ab0AZSYV (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:24:21 -0500 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Larry Finger Subject: Re: Locking Problem in 2.6.33-rc5 Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 19:25:13 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.3 (Linux/2.6.33-rc4-rjw; KDE/4.3.3; x86_64; ; ) Cc: LKML References: <4B5F1F8C.6090406@lwfinger.net> In-Reply-To: <4B5F1F8C.6090406@lwfinger.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201001261925.13249.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2523 Lines: 55 On Tuesday 26 January 2010, Larry Finger wrote: > On suspend to RAM, I get the following recursive locking message: > > ============================================= > [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ] > 2.6.33-rc5-Linus-dirty #173 > --------------------------------------------- > sh/3488 is trying to acquire lock: > (s_active){++++.+}, at: [] sysfs_addrm_finish+0x43/0x70 > > but task is already holding lock: > (s_active){++++.+}, at: [] sysfs_get_active_two+0x3d/0x60 > > other info that might help us debug this: > 4 locks held by sh/3488: > #0: (&buffer->mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [] > sysfs_write_file+0x3f/0x160 > #1: (s_active){++++.+}, at: [] sysfs_get_active_two+0x3d/0x60 > #2: (s_active){++++.+}, at: [] sysfs_get_active_two+0x22/0x60 > #3: (dbs_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [] > cpufreq_governor_dbs+0xe7/0x480 > > stack backtrace: > Pid: 3488, comm: sh Not tainted 2.6.33-rc5-Linus-dirty #173 > Call Trace: > [] __lock_acquire+0xf6b/0x1d30 > [] ? lockdep_init_map+0x5f/0x5d0 > [] lock_acquire+0x9b/0x120 > [] ? sysfs_addrm_finish+0x43/0x70 > [] sysfs_deactivate+0xc3/0x110 > [] ? sysfs_addrm_finish+0x43/0x70 > [] sysfs_addrm_finish+0x43/0x70 > [] sysfs_hash_and_remove+0x56/0x80 > [] sysfs_remove_group+0x4f/0xf0 > [] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0xfb/0x480 > [] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x14d/0x190 > [] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xd/0x10 > [] __cpufreq_governor+0x94/0x160 > [] __cpufreq_set_policy+0x11f/0x180 > [] store_scaling_governor+0xc6/0x200 > [] ? handle_update+0x0/0x10 > [] store+0x62/0x90 > [] sysfs_write_file+0xe1/0x160 > [] vfs_write+0xb8/0x180 > [] sys_write+0x4c/0x80 > [] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b Does the patch at http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/ fix it? Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/