Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: 2.6.21 reiserfs -- cicular locking? | From | "Antonino A. Daplas" <> | Date | Sat, 28 Apr 2007 01:11:54 +0800 |
| |
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 12:21 -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Jeff Mahoney wrote: > > Takashi Iwai wrote: > >>> At Fri, 27 Apr 2007 07:09:01 -0400, > >>> Jeff Mahoney wrote: > >>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >>>> Hash: SHA1 > >>>> > >>>> Takashi Iwai wrote: > >>>>> At Fri, 27 Apr 2007 12:09:03 +0200, > >>>>> I wrote: > >>>>>> I got a similar bug right now at the fresh boot of 2.6.21. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ReiserFS: sda2: found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal > >>>>>> ReiserFS: sda2: using ordered data mode > >>>>>> ReiserFS: sda2: journal params: device sda2, size 8192, journal first block 18, max trans len 1024, max batch 900, max commit age 30, max trans age 30 > >>>>>> ReiserFS: sda2: checking transaction log (sda2) > >>>>>> ReiserFS: sda2: Using r5 hash to sort names > >>>>>> ReiserFS: sda2: Removing [3613 1354701 0x0 SD]..done > >>>>>> ReiserFS: sda2: There were 1 uncompleted unlinks/truncates. Completed > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ======================================================= > >>>>>> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ] > >>>>>> 2.6.21-work #1 > >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>>> mktemp/1459 is trying to acquire lock: > >>>>>> (&REISERFS_I(inode)->xattr_sem){..--}, at: [<e08a5236>] reiserfs_cache_default_acl+0x2a/0x9c [reiserfs] > >>>>>> > >>>>>> but task is already holding lock: > >>>>>> (&inode->i_mutex){--..}, at: [<c016d7dc>] open_namei+0xe2/0x5a2 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> which lock already depends on the new lock. > >>>>> The message disappears when I revert the patch: > >>>>> > >>>>> commit 9b7f375505f5611efb562065b57814b28a81abc3 > >>>>> Author: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> > >>>>> Date: Mon Apr 23 14:41:17 2007 -0700 > >>>>> > >>>>> reiserfs: fix xattr root locking/refcount bug > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> So, likely a newly introduced bug after rc7... > >>>> I got a message with a trace similar to this from Vladimir before I > >>>> submitted that patch. I'm not sure how to annotate this, since the > >>>> xattr_sem can never be taken in the manner described. Internal inodes > >>>> are protected by I_PRIVATE. > >>> Hm, then maybe my case was just a coincidence. > >>> > >>> FWIW, I can reproduce the deadlock warning at each time I boot > >>> non-patched 2.6.21, and after reverting the patch, it disappeared. > > > > Ok, so I took another look at the report Vladimir sent me. The trace he > > ran into was in the delete inode path, but was still a race between the > > xattr_sem and the inode sem. Since we're locking the xattr root on the > > xattr read path now, this condition arises more freqently, but it's > > really the same one he reported. > > > > I'm using the default openSUSE config, which doesn't enable mutex > > debugging. I'll rebuild with it, and hopefully come up with a way to > > kill the warning. > > I still didn't get the warning, but can you try this and let me know > if it fixes it?
I also reported this in another thread. With this patch, I haven't seen the tracing anymore.
Tony
- 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/
| |