Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 16 Oct 2007 02:08:26 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: Possible circular locking: ->mmap_sem vs jbd_handle |
| |
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:05:12 +0200 Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 02:01 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 12:54:29 +0400 Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@sw.ru> wrote: > > > > > Got this during LTP's diotest1. Reproducable. > > > > > > ======================================================= > > > [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ] > > > 2.6.23-65a6ec0d72a07f16719e9b7a96e1c4bae044b591 #2 > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > diotest1/13563 is trying to acquire lock: > > > (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c107a7b7>] dio_get_page+0x4b/0x16b > > > > > > but task is already holding lock: > > > (jbd_handle){--..}, at: [<c1099b05>] journal_start+0xf3/0x120 > > > > > > which lock already depends on the new lock. > > > > Someone taught lockdep about journal_start? That's gonna hurt. > > It was you who suggested doing so,...
yeah, but I didn't think anyone would go and do it!
> Are these valid reports, or is the annotation wrong?
It's valid. There will be others..
- 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/
| |