Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Subject | Re: v2.6.28-rc1: possible recursive locking detected | Date | Wed, 29 Oct 2008 00:00:39 +0100 |
| |
On Sunday, 26 of October 2008, Vegard Nossum wrote: > Hi, > > I think that this wasn't my fault. It's v2.6.28-rc1+kmemcheck.
Is this reproducible on -rc2?
Rafael
> ============================================= > [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ] > 2.6.28-rc1 #58 > --------------------------------------------- > cat/25690 is trying to acquire lock: > (&hashbin->hb_spinlock){....}, at: [<c1780e1f>] irias_seq_show+0x3f/0x180 > > but task is already holding lock: > (&hashbin->hb_spinlock){....}, at: [<c1780f95>] irias_seq_start+0x15/0x90 > > other info that might help us debug this: > 2 locks held by cat/25690: > #0: (&p->lock){--..}, at: [<c0502545>] seq_read+0x25/0x2e0 > #1: (&hashbin->hb_spinlock){....}, at: [<c1780f95>] irias_seq_start+0x15/0x90 > > stack backtrace: > Pid: 25690, comm: cat Not tainted 2.6.28-rc1 #58 > Call Trace: > [<c195b5d6>] ? printk+0x18/0x1a > [<c048a0bb>] __lock_acquire+0xf0b/0xf80 > [<c044c8da>] ? kmemcheck_hide_addr+0x4a/0x60 > [<c042529b>] ? do_debug+0x3b/0x1b0 > [<c048a1a1>] lock_acquire+0x71/0xa0 > [<c1780e1f>] ? irias_seq_show+0x3f/0x180 > [<c195e636>] _spin_lock+0x36/0x60 > [<c1780e1f>] ? irias_seq_show+0x3f/0x180 > [<c1780e1f>] irias_seq_show+0x3f/0x180 > [<c050270c>] seq_read+0x1ec/0x2e0 > [<c0502520>] ? seq_read+0x0/0x2e0 > [<c05297ed>] proc_reg_read+0x5d/0x90 > [<c04ea749>] vfs_read+0x99/0x160 > [<c0529790>] ? proc_reg_read+0x0/0x90 > [<c04ea8cd>] sys_read+0x3d/0x70 > [<c0422f83>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x3f > [<c0420000>] ? svm_intr_assist+0x90/0x1a0 > > > Vegard >
| |