lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Linux 2.6.22-rc7


On Tue, 3 Jul 2007, Andre Noll wrote:
>
> On 14:32, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > Ok, Linux-2.6.22-rc7 is out there.
> >
> > Final testing always appreciated, of course,
>
> There seems to be a locking problem:

Ok, I _think_ this is actually ok, and the lock validator is unhappy just
because we don't disable irq's when initializing the slab, so the fact
that we take the list_lock with interrupts enabled looks scary.

But the reason it seems to be ok is that it doesn't matter if interrupts
are enabled or not, because nobody can *get* to the list_lock, since the
thing hasn't been fully set up yet. So no interrupts will try to take the
lock (and cause any deadlocks) anyway.

However, it might be worth avoiding the warning, even if it seems bogus in
this case. Christoph? Do you agree with the analysis? And the patch might
be as simple as changing early_kmem_cache_node_alloc() to enable
interrupts at the _end_ of the function, rather than immediately after
calling new_slab().

Andre, does that simple change fix it for you (move the
"local_irq_enable()" to the end of early_kmem_cache_node_alloc)?

Linus

---
> [ 89.772943] =================================
> [ 89.773194] [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
> [ 89.773325] 2.6.22-rc7 #44
> [ 89.773459] ---------------------------------
> [ 89.773591] inconsistent {hardirq-on-W} -> {in-hardirq-W} usage.
> [ 89.773730] swapper/0 [HC1[1]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] takes:
> [ 89.773862] (&n->list_lock){+-..}, at: [<ffffffff8028cd7c>] add_partial+0x1c/0x60
> [ 89.774314] {hardirq-on-W} state was registered at:
> [ 89.774468] [<ffffffff8024c542>] __lock_acquire+0x152/0x1070
> [ 89.774798] [<ffffffff8024dc61>] debug_check_no_locks_freed+0x101/0x1c0
> [ 89.775139] [<ffffffff8028cd7c>] add_partial+0x1c/0x60
> [ 89.775471] [<ffffffff8024d82b>] lock_acquire+0x8b/0xc0
> [ 89.775797] [<ffffffff8028cd7c>] add_partial+0x1c/0x60
> [ 89.776125] [<ffffffff805364f5>] _spin_lock+0x25/0x40
> [ 89.776453] [<ffffffff8028cd7c>] add_partial+0x1c/0x60
> [ 89.776778] [<ffffffff80290dab>] kmem_cache_open+0x1db/0x300
> [ 89.777108] [<ffffffff802912ea>] create_kmalloc_cache+0x6a/0xe0
> [ 89.777459] [<ffffffff806f848c>] kmem_cache_init+0x3c/0x170
> [ 89.777791] [<ffffffff806de7da>] start_kernel+0x21a/0x330
> [ 89.778120] [<ffffffff806de124>] _sinittext+0x124/0x160
> [ 89.778450] [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
> [ 89.778772] irq event stamp: 4974
> [ 89.778898] hardirqs last enabled at (4973): [<ffffffff80208257>] default_idle+0x37/0x60
> [ 89.779220] hardirqs last disabled at (4974): [<ffffffff805360a1>] trace_hardirqs_off_thunk+0x35/0x67
> [ 89.779549] softirqs last enabled at (4966): [<ffffffff80233753>] __do_softirq+0xf3/0x110
> [ 89.779868] softirqs last disabled at (4959): [<ffffffff8020adcc>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x30
> [ 89.780189]
> [ 89.780190] other info that might help us debug this:
> [ 89.780455] no locks held by swapper/0.
> [ 89.780584]
> [ 89.780584] stack backtrace:
> [ 89.780814]
> [ 89.780815] Call Trace:
> [ 89.781046] <IRQ> [<ffffffff8024ae36>] print_usage_bug+0x186/0x1a0
> [ 89.781256] [<ffffffff8024c26c>] mark_lock+0x49c/0x620
> [ 89.781401] [<ffffffff8024ce47>] __lock_acquire+0xa57/0x1070
> [ 89.781542] [<ffffffff8022804d>] run_rebalance_domains+0x3bd/0x4e0
> [ 89.781684] [<ffffffff8028cd7c>] add_partial+0x1c/0x60
> [ 89.781819] [<ffffffff8024d82b>] lock_acquire+0x8b/0xc0
> [ 89.781956] [<ffffffff8028cd7c>] add_partial+0x1c/0x60
> [ 89.782093] [<ffffffff805364f5>] _spin_lock+0x25/0x40
> [ 89.782230] [<ffffffff80232f91>] _local_bh_enable+0x61/0xf0
> [ 89.782371] [<ffffffff8028cd7c>] add_partial+0x1c/0x60
> [ 89.782508] [<ffffffff8028f8a0>] deactivate_slab+0x60/0x150
> [ 89.782646] [<ffffffff8028f9e0>] flush_cpu_slab+0x0/0x20
> [ 89.782786] [<ffffffff8028f9b2>] flush_slab+0x22/0x30
> [ 89.782921] [<ffffffff8028f9db>] __flush_cpu_slab+0x1b/0x20
> [ 89.783061] [<ffffffff8028f9f1>] flush_cpu_slab+0x11/0x20
> [ 89.783198] [<ffffffff802146df>] smp_call_function_interrupt+0x4f/0x80
> [ 89.783341] [<ffffffff80208220>] default_idle+0x0/0x60
> [ 89.783478] [<ffffffff8020a79b>] call_function_interrupt+0x6b/0x70
> [ 89.783618] <EOI> [<ffffffff80208259>] default_idle+0x39/0x60
> [ 89.783824] [<ffffffff80208257>] default_idle+0x37/0x60
> [ 89.783962] [<ffffffff802082e1>] cpu_idle+0x61/0x90
> [ 89.784098] [<ffffffff806eb10b>] start_secondary+0x25b/0x3c0
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-07-03 18:21    [W:0.053 / U:8.484 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site