Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753974Ab0A0JuH (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jan 2010 04:50:07 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753820Ab0A0JuF (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jan 2010 04:50:05 -0500 Received: from mail-qy0-f204.google.com ([209.85.221.204]:55017 "EHLO mail-qy0-f204.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752652Ab0A0JuD convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jan 2010 04:50:03 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=N/cCh+OqOZ8aLfbxSQd0wfiBH7fAImvDqOvzs5guiKx/sPrmtCyhj6EyyGDj/jhfO3 dM75lw3bHQkb2AGeWLDlH/ciBBzR4nfE823ffXuH4NFQevZ6VRafhpQYmylj5vplONmf 2WktymrUzZlxhqYCfDrdJs8et/Gxi1lNAS9/s= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201001261925.13249.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <4B5F1F8C.6090406@lwfinger.net> <201001261925.13249.rjw@sisk.pl> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:50:00 +0800 Message-ID: <2375c9f91001270150o57cb87a4m7f0ecfbe39c333f1@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Locking Problem in 2.6.33-rc5 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Am=C3=A9rico_Wang?= To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Larry Finger , LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2936 Lines: 63 On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 2:25 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > 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? > It is not related with this bug, IMO. This bug was reported at least 3 times recently, Eric sent a patch for this bug, but amazingly that patch doesn't work, I will look for some time to dig more to see what is wrong with that patch. Thanks. -- 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/