Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:50:12 -0600 | From | Larry Finger <> | Subject | Re: [Patch 2/2] block: add sysfs lockdep class for iosched |
| |
On 02/08/2010 03:52 AM, Amerigo Wang wrote: > Similar to the previous PM case, in iosched, we hold an s_active > lock to store "scheduler", meanwhile we want to remove "iosched/*" > files. > > This patch depends on the previous one. I tested it on my machine, > it fixes the problem. > > Reported-by: Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk> > Signed-off-by: WANG Cong <amwang@redhat.com> > Cc: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
After applying the 2 patches to 2.6.33-rc7, I get the following:
ACPI: bus type pci registered PCI: MMCONFIG for domain 0000 [bus 00-09] at [mem 0xe0000000-0xe09fffff] (base 0xe0000000) PCI: MMCONFIG at [mem 0xe0000000-0xe09fffff] reserved in E820 PCI: Using configuration type 1 for base access INFO: trying to register non-static key. the code is fine but needs lockdep annotation. turning off the locking correctness validator. Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.33-rc7-Linus-00010-g6339204-dirty #181 Call Trace: [<ffffffff8107c6e6>] __lock_acquire+0xf86/0x1d30 [<ffffffff81078e7f>] ? lockdep_init_map+0x5f/0x5d0 [<ffffffff8107d52b>] lock_acquire+0x9b/0x120 [<ffffffff81167a93>] ? sysfs_addrm_finish+0x43/0x70 [<ffffffff81167243>] sysfs_deactivate+0xc3/0x110 [<ffffffff81167a93>] ? sysfs_addrm_finish+0x43/0x70 [<ffffffff813124d3>] ? mutex_lock_nested+0x243/0x300 [<ffffffff81167a93>] sysfs_addrm_finish+0x43/0x70 [<ffffffff81167af6>] remove_dir+0x36/0x40 [<ffffffff81167b09>] sysfs_remove_subdir+0x9/0x10 [<ffffffff81168ff6>] sysfs_remove_group+0x66/0xf0 [<ffffffff81861555>] param_sysfs_init+0x102/0x277 [<ffffffff8124a5bd>] ? sysdev_create_file+0xd/0x10 [<ffffffff8130fe46>] ? register_cpu+0xa3/0xa5 [<ffffffff81861453>] ? param_sysfs_init+0x0/0x277 [<ffffffff810001d7>] do_one_initcall+0x37/0x190 [<ffffffff8184c6d0>] kernel_init+0x14f/0x1a5 [<ffffffff81003bd4>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10 [<ffffffff8131417c>] ? restore_args+0x0/0x30 [<ffffffff8184c581>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x1a5 [<ffffffff81003bd0>] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x0/0x10
This dump does not occur with standard 2.6.33-rc7. As the above turns off the locking correctness validator, I cannot really test to see what happens when suspending.
Larry
| |