Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757823Ab0BLCLe (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Feb 2010 21:11:34 -0500 Received: from mail-ew0-f228.google.com ([209.85.219.228]:62888 "EHLO mail-ew0-f228.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755913Ab0BLCLc convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Feb 2010 21:11:32 -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=Akn/XUoU1wTHrQZzmqH2ZkHqtTBozcGBELi0WR1uq/2zuKRhDtleXxqJFz69DopHp2 8IiaDVTCz7zn647UPuIW+B+sm8B8HO45W5cRcppOKWCvjq5PQQUacwYXL+G7PaJvqQAs WGVRzAgVb7BkHXVhWNeBi2JViShKEleYjqcHE= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20100210212655.7784dc5b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <201002110043.o1B0hKxW008835@imap1.linux-foundation.org> <5114.1265865104@localhost> <20100210212655.7784dc5b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:11:30 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: mmotm 2010-02-10 - lockdep whinge in ACPI code From: Dave Young To: Andrew Morton Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, Len Brown , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Greg KH , Kay Sievers , Thomas Gleixner 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: 4445 Lines: 91 On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 00:11:44 -0500 Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > >> On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 16:17:41 PST, akpm@linux-foundation.org said: >> > The mm-of-the-moment snapshot 2010-02-10-16-17 has been uploaded to >> > >> > http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/mmotm/ >> >> Seen at boot: >> >> [ 0.207242] ACPI: (supports S0 S5) >> [ 0.207257] ACPI: Using IOAPIC for interrupt routing >> [ 0.335315] >> [ 0.335316] ============================================= >> [ 0.335483] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ] >> [ 0.335572] 2.6.33-rc7-mmotm0210 #1 >> [ 0.335658] --------------------------------------------- >> [ 0.335746] swapper/1 is trying to acquire lock: >> [ 0.335834] (&dev->mutex){+.+...}, at: [] __driver_attach+0x47/0x80 >> [ 0.335999] >> [ 0.335999] but task is already holding lock: >> [ 0.335999] (&dev->mutex){+.+...}, at: [] __driver_attach+0x39/0x80 >> [ 0.335999] >> [ 0.335999] other info that might help us debug this: >> [ 0.335999] 1 lock held by swapper/1: >> [ 0.335999] #0: (&dev->mutex){+.+...}, at: [] __driver_attach+0x39/0x80 >> [ 0.335999] >> [ 0.335999] stack backtrace: >> [ 0.335999] Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.33-rc7-mmotm0210 #1 >> [ 0.335999] Call Trace: >> [ 0.335999] [] __lock_acquire+0xc77/0xcee >> [ 0.335999] [] ? mark_lock+0x2d/0x22c >> [ 0.335999] [] ? __driver_attach+0x47/0x80 >> [ 0.335999] [] lock_acquire+0xcb/0xe8 >> [ 0.335999] [] ? __driver_attach+0x47/0x80 >> [ 0.335999] [] ? mark_held_locks+0x52/0x70 >> [ 0.335999] [] __mutex_lock_common+0x5c/0x5aa >> [ 0.335999] [] ? __driver_attach+0x47/0x80 >> [ 0.335999] [] ? klist_next+0x24/0xd7 >> [ 0.335999] [] ? __driver_attach+0x47/0x80 >> [ 0.335999] [] ? __driver_attach+0x0/0x80 >> [ 0.335999] [] mutex_lock_nested+0x34/0x39 >> [ 0.335999] [] __driver_attach+0x47/0x80 >> [ 0.335999] [] ? __driver_attach+0x0/0x80 >> [ 0.335999] [] ? __driver_attach+0x0/0x80 >> [ 0.335999] [] bus_for_each_dev+0x54/0x89 >> [ 0.335999] [] driver_attach+0x19/0x1b >> [ 0.335999] [] bus_add_driver+0xb4/0x203 >> [ 0.335999] [] driver_register+0xb8/0x129 >> [ 0.335999] [] acpi_bus_register_driver+0x3e/0x40 >> [ 0.335999] [] acpi_ec_init+0x37/0x55 >> [ 0.335999] [] acpi_init+0x115/0x12a >> [ 0.335999] [] ? acpi_init+0x0/0x12a >> [ 0.335999] [] do_one_initcall+0x59/0x14e >> [ 0.335999] [] kernel_init+0x14d/0x1a3 >> [ 0.335999] [] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10 >> [ 0.335999] [] ? restore_args+0x0/0x30 >> [ 0.335999] [] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x1a3 >> [ 0.335999] [] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x0/0x10 >> [ 0.340036] ACPI: EC: GPE = 0x11, I/O: command/status = 0x934, data = 0x930 >> > > driver_attach() got converted from sem to mutex in linux-next. So this > is probably an old bug which just got exposed. Here is the possible fix for this: http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/8/161 > > Or maybe not. Thomas, has that patch been in some other tree (rt?) for > a while? If so, was this bug observed in that tree? If not, it might > be new. > > -- > 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/ > -- Regards dave -- 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/