Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752509Ab2JAL7o (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Oct 2012 07:59:44 -0400 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:18070 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750991Ab2JAL7n (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Oct 2012 07:59:43 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,515,1344236400"; d="scan'208";a="228537244" Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 19:59:36 +0800 From: Fengguang Wu To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: LKML , mingo@kernel.org Subject: Re: task_work_add/scheduler_tick: possible circular locking dependency detected Message-ID: <20121001115936.GA17830@localhost> References: <20120928113402.GA577@localhost> <1349088639.7780.4.camel@twins> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1349088639.7780.4.camel@twins> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1592 Lines: 38 On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 12:50:39PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 19:34 +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > Peter, > > > > I got the warning > > > > [ 10.412023] > > [ 10.412611] ====================================================== > > [ 10.413014] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ] > > [ 10.413014] 3.6.0-rc4-00098-g7eaffe9 #402 Not tainted > > [ 10.413014] ------------------------------------------------------- > > [ 10.413014] init/1 is trying to acquire lock: > > [ 10.413014] (&p->pi_lock){-.-.-.}, at: [] task_work_add+0x28/0x82 > > [ 10.413014] > > [ 10.413014] but task is already holding lock: > > [ 10.413014] (&rq->lock){-.-.-.}, at: [] scheduler_tick+0x3f/0xec > > [ 10.413014] > > [ 10.413014] which lock already depends on the new lock. > > [ 10.413014] > > [ 10.413014] > > > > The commit ac3d0da8f3290b3d394cdb7f50604424a7cd6092 should avoid this > from happening, not sure what branch its on, but it was in tip before > all this landed, so I guess its due to you testing sched/numa branch and > not a merged branch like master or auto-next. Peter, you are right, it's tested in tip:sched/numa. linux-next is fine. Hmm, I should automatically test linux-next before raising the problem, hehe. Thanks, Fengguang -- 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/