Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757344Ab0BLRVe (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Feb 2010 12:21:34 -0500 Received: from sabe.cs.wisc.edu ([128.105.6.20]:48242 "EHLO sabe.cs.wisc.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756218Ab0BLRVc (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Feb 2010 12:21:32 -0500 Message-ID: <4B758E09.9030708@cs.wisc.edu> Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:21:13 -0600 From: Mike Christie User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100120 Fedora/3.0.1-1.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: open-iscsi@googlegroups.com CC: Tao Ma , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: lockdep warning for iscsi in 2.6.33-rc6 References: <4B7107CF.3060703@oracle.com> <4B71B7D9.9040501@cs.wisc.edu> <4B7200DC.60103@oracle.com> In-Reply-To: <4B7200DC.60103@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1685 Lines: 37 On 02/09/2010 06:42 PM, Tao Ma wrote: > Hi Mike, > > Mike Christie wrote: >> On 02/09/2010 12:59 AM, Tao Ma wrote: >>> Hi Mike, >>> I meet with a lockdep warning for iscsi in 2.6.33-rc6. >>> the lockdep is attached. >>> >> >> If the lockdep output is saying that there is a problem with the iscsi >> host taking its mutex then the scsi host mutex, I think that might be >> a mistake in the lockdep detection. We always take the iscsi host >> mutex then take the scsi host mutex. >> >> Could it get confused if we are scanning two hosts at the same time? >> If it is just looking at if a lock is being taken then it would look >> like host1 has its ihost->mutex and then took its shost->mutex, but >> then host2 could start to get scanned at the same time, and it is >> going to take its ihost->mutex. It would then look like we are trying >> to grab a ihost->mutex while holding a shost->mutex. However, the >> mutexs are not global and they are different instances of the mutex >> because each host has its own. > If these 2 mutexes are grabed in the same order(in your description, > ihost->mutex first and then shost->mutex), there would be no problem. I checked the code and we are taking the locks in the proper order, but I did some more testing and I do not think it was detecting what I thought above. I just did a login with one iscsi session and got the lockdep warning. So I will do some more digging into what is going on. -- 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/