Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756073Ab1BQMJu (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Feb 2011 07:09:50 -0500 Received: from smtp5-g21.free.fr ([212.27.42.5]:59117 "EHLO smtp5-g21.free.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755445Ab1BQMJq (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Feb 2011 07:09:46 -0500 Message-ID: <4D5D0FFC.40509@free.fr> Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 13:09:32 +0100 From: Daniel Lezcano User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101208 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tejun Heo CC: Yong Zhang , David Miller , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2323 trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0xb9/0x16c() References: <4D5A90D0.9040403@free.fr> <20110216.180347.71107177.davem@davemloft.net> <20110217112842.GS19830@htj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20110217112842.GS19830@htj.dyndns.org> 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: 3110 Lines: 76 On 02/17/2011 12:28 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 10:43:57AM +0800, Yong Zhang wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 10:03 AM, David Miller wrote: >>> From: Yong Zhang >>> Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 09:37:30 +0800 >>> >>>> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 10:42 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >>>>> Hi All, >>>>> >>>>> I am running a 2.6.38-rc4-next-20110215+ kernel on qemu x86_64 and the >>>>> following traces appear in the console: >>>>> >>>>> Feb 15 15:00:24 lucid kernel: ------------[ cut here ]------------ >>>>> Feb 15 15:00:24 lucid kernel: WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2323 >>>>> trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0xb9/0x16c() >>>>> Feb 15 15:00:24 lucid kernel: Hardware name: Bochs >>>>> Feb 15 15:00:24 lucid kernel: Pid: 1477, comm: mountall Not tainted >>>>> 2.6.38-rc4-next-20110215+ #74 >>>>> Feb 15 15:00:24 lucid kernel: Call Trace: >>>>> Feb 15 15:00:24 lucid kernel: [] ? >>>>> warn_slowpath_common+0x7b/0x93 >>>>> Feb 15 15:00:24 lucid kernel: [] ? >>>>> _raw_spin_unlock_irq+0x2b/0x30 >>>>> Feb 15 15:00:24 lucid kernel: [] ? >>>>> warn_slowpath_null+0x15/0x17 >>>>> Feb 15 15:00:24 lucid kernel: [] ? >>>>> trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0xb9/0x16c >>>>> Feb 15 15:00:24 lucid kernel: [] ? >>>>> trace_hardirqs_on+0xd/0xf >>>>> Feb 15 15:00:24 lucid kernel: [] ? >>>>> _raw_spin_unlock_irq+0x2b/0x30 >>>>> Feb 15 15:00:24 lucid kernel: [] ? >>>>> do_ide_request+0x32/0x590 >>>> Seems related to IDE SUBSYSTEM >>> Which hasn't had any changes in the past release. >> OK. >> >> Cc'ing Tejun Heo >> >> For the back trace, I think __blk_run_queue() is the ligament. >> As from the comment of __blk_run_queue(), it must be called >> with the queue lock and interrupts disabled. And the lock >> is hold through spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags); at >> blk_end_bidi_request(). >> >> But in do_ide_request(), it realse the lock through >> spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock); which make the state >> inconsistent. >> >> BTW, do_ide_request() also say it might_sleep(), this warning >> also trigger in Daniel's log. > This seems to be the same problem Jan reported and fixed by the > following patches. > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1101766/raw > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ide/48819/raw > > Can you please test whether these two patches fix the problem? Thanks Tejun ! I applied these patches to linux-next and I blindly fixed some minors conflicts. AFAICT, the problem does no longer occur and it seems the patches fix the problem. I am not sure I resolved the conflict correctly as I know nothing about this subsystem. Shall I resend these patches for inclusion and you check they are correct ? -- Daniel -- 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/