Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755065Ab0BOKEI (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Feb 2010 05:04:08 -0500 Received: from mail-pz0-f197.google.com ([209.85.222.197]:48651 "EHLO mail-pz0-f197.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754334Ab0BOKEG (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Feb 2010 05:04:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <520f0cf11002141822i7c77c58cl2e00305ca6890f90@mail.gmail.com> References: <520f0cf11002110911t3f125649v73062e9851e2cfb3@mail.gmail.com> <520f0cf11002140510w5c57d196n12f8036ea6085c52@mail.gmail.com> <520f0cf11002141254y3f4536a9ta968dbaefbff58f7@mail.gmail.com> <520f0cf11002141822i7c77c58cl2e00305ca6890f90@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 01:56:45 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [BUG]: Possibe recursive locking detected in sysfs From: Eric Biederman To: John Kacur Cc: LKML , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Tejun Heo , Serge Hallyn , "David P. Quigley" , James Morris Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1640 Lines: 40 On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 6:22 PM, John Kacur wrote: > On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Eric Biederman > wrote: >>> Sure, are you referring to the patch-set that begins with >>> "[PATCH 1/6] sysfs: Serialize updates to the vfs inode"? >> >> Sorry no. >> >> http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/11/329 >> > > I applied your patch, and yes, it removed the possible recursive > locking detected message, but everything still froze. > I don't think I really have any good info from the crash to report. > Your patch seems to have added the symptom of a huge number of > BUG: key ffff880126269e40 not in .data! > BUG: key ffff880136fc03f0 not in .data! Those are from dynamic sysfs entries that I have not yet annoted with sysfs_attr_init, and are generally harmless. If you happen to see the first one. I would appreciate having the backtrace so I can see about fixing it. With respect to your problem the important point is that lockdep does not throw a warning and disable itself. Can you verify that? Assuming that lockdep has not complained and disabled itself than my patches are successful at disabling the sysfs lockdep false positives (except those BUG: key ... not in .data messages). and the lockdep warnings are just a coincidence in your case. I believe the cause of your hang is somewhere else entirely. Perhaps a driver regression. Eric -- 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/