Messages in this thread | | | From | Maciej Rutecki <> | Subject | Re: 3.3-rc2 snd_pcm lockdep backtrace | Date | Wed, 8 Feb 2012 18:54:08 +0100 |
| |
On poniedziałek, 6 lutego 2012 o 15:56:22 Josh Boyer wrote: > Hi All, > > We've had a report[1] of a lockdep backtrace from the snd_pcm driver. I > was wondering if anyone had hit this already or had some decent ideas on > what the issue might be. > > josh > > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787319 > > backtrace: > :[ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ] > :3.3.0-0.rc2.git2.1.fc17.x86_64 #1 Not tainted > :--------------------------------------------- > : > :pulseaudio/954 is trying to acquire lock: > : (&(&substream->self_group.lock)->rlock/1){......}, at: > : [<ffffffffa00d9093>] > > snd_pcm_action_group+0xa3/0x240 [snd_pcm] > > :but task is already holding lock: > : (&(&substream->self_group.lock)->rlock/1){......}, at: > : [<ffffffffa00d9093>] > > snd_pcm_action_group+0xa3/0x240 [snd_pcm] > > :other info that might help us debug this: > : Possible unsafe locking scenario: > : CPU0 > : ---- > : > : lock(&(&substream->self_group.lock)->rlock/1); > : lock(&(&substream->self_group.lock)->rlock/1); > : > : *** DEADLOCK *** > : May be due to missing lock nesting notation > : > :4 locks held by pulseaudio/954: > : #0: (snd_pcm_link_rwlock){......}, at: [<ffffffffa00d9e62>] > > snd_pcm_drop+0x62/0x110 [snd_pcm] > > : #1: (&(&substream->self_group.lock)->rlock){......}, at: > [<ffffffffa00d9e6a>] snd_pcm_drop+0x6a/0x110 [snd_pcm] > > : #2: (&(&substream->group->lock)->rlock){......}, at: > : [<ffffffffa00d93ce>] > > snd_pcm_action+0x3e/0xb0 [snd_pcm] > > : #3: (&(&substream->self_group.lock)->rlock/1){......}, at: > [<ffffffffa00d9093>] snd_pcm_action_group+0xa3/0x240 [snd_pcm] > > :stack backtrace: > :Pid: 954, comm: pulseaudio Not tainted 3.3.0-0.rc2.git2.1.fc17.x86_64 #1 > : > :Call Trace: > : [<ffffffff810cb7ec>] __lock_acquire+0x160c/0x1ad0 > : [<ffffffff810ca4f6>] ? __lock_acquire+0x316/0x1ad0 > : [<ffffffff81020f99>] ? sched_clock+0x9/0x10 > : [<ffffffff810a24a5>] ? sched_clock_local+0x25/0xa0 > : [<ffffffff810cc381>] lock_acquire+0xa1/0x1e0 > : [<ffffffffa00d9093>] ? snd_pcm_action_group+0xa3/0x240 [snd_pcm] > : [<ffffffff8169cca4>] _raw_spin_lock_nested+0x44/0x80 > : [<ffffffffa00d9093>] ? snd_pcm_action_group+0xa3/0x240 [snd_pcm] > : [<ffffffffa00d9093>] snd_pcm_action_group+0xa3/0x240 [snd_pcm] > : [<ffffffffa00d9401>] snd_pcm_action+0x71/0xb0 [snd_pcm] > : [<ffffffffa00d945a>] snd_pcm_stop+0x1a/0x20 [snd_pcm] > : [<ffffffffa00d9e84>] snd_pcm_drop+0x84/0x110 [snd_pcm] > : [<ffffffffa00dbba8>] snd_pcm_common_ioctl1+0x4a8/0xbe0 [snd_pcm] > : [<ffffffffa00dc650>] snd_pcm_playback_ioctl1+0x60/0x2d0 [snd_pcm] > : [<ffffffff812c1481>] ? file_has_perm+0xe1/0xf0 > : [<ffffffffa00dc8f4>] snd_pcm_playback_ioctl+0x34/0x40 [snd_pcm] > : [<ffffffff811cf8d9>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x99/0x5a0 > : [<ffffffff811cfe79>] sys_ioctl+0x99/0xa0 > : [<ffffffff816a63e9>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b >
I created a Bugzilla entry at https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42746 for your bug report, please add your address to the CC list in there, thanks!
-- Maciej Rutecki http://www.mrutecki.pl -- 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/
| |