Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Subject | Re: Locking Problem in 2.6.33-rc5 | Date | Tue, 26 Jan 2010 19:25:13 +0100 |
| |
On Tuesday 26 January 2010, Larry Finger wrote: > On suspend to RAM, I get the following recursive locking message: > > ============================================= > [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ] > 2.6.33-rc5-Linus-dirty #173 > --------------------------------------------- > sh/3488 is trying to acquire lock: > (s_active){++++.+}, at: [<ffffffff81167413>] sysfs_addrm_finish+0x43/0x70 > > but task is already holding lock: > (s_active){++++.+}, at: [<ffffffff8116771d>] sysfs_get_active_two+0x3d/0x60 > > other info that might help us debug this: > 4 locks held by sh/3488: > #0: (&buffer->mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81165b7f>] > sysfs_write_file+0x3f/0x160 > #1: (s_active){++++.+}, at: [<ffffffff8116771d>] sysfs_get_active_two+0x3d/0x60 > #2: (s_active){++++.+}, at: [<ffffffff81167702>] sysfs_get_active_two+0x22/0x60 > #3: (dbs_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81271517>] > cpufreq_governor_dbs+0xe7/0x480 > > stack backtrace: > Pid: 3488, comm: sh Not tainted 2.6.33-rc5-Linus-dirty #173 > Call Trace: > [<ffffffff8107c36b>] __lock_acquire+0xf6b/0x1d30 > [<ffffffff81078e9f>] ? lockdep_init_map+0x5f/0x5d0 > [<ffffffff8107d1cb>] lock_acquire+0x9b/0x120 > [<ffffffff81167413>] ? sysfs_addrm_finish+0x43/0x70 > [<ffffffff81166ba3>] sysfs_deactivate+0xc3/0x110 > [<ffffffff81167413>] ? sysfs_addrm_finish+0x43/0x70 > [<ffffffff81167413>] sysfs_addrm_finish+0x43/0x70 > [<ffffffff81165206>] sysfs_hash_and_remove+0x56/0x80 > [<ffffffff8116895f>] sysfs_remove_group+0x4f/0xf0 > [<ffffffff8127152b>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0xfb/0x480 > [<ffffffff8107a8dd>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x14d/0x190 > [<ffffffff8107a92d>] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xd/0x10 > [<ffffffff8126e314>] __cpufreq_governor+0x94/0x160 > [<ffffffff8126f84f>] __cpufreq_set_policy+0x11f/0x180 > [<ffffffff8126fc66>] store_scaling_governor+0xc6/0x200 > [<ffffffff81270530>] ? handle_update+0x0/0x10 > [<ffffffff8126f702>] store+0x62/0x90 > [<ffffffff81165c21>] sysfs_write_file+0xe1/0x160 > [<ffffffff8110b0c8>] vfs_write+0xb8/0x180 > [<ffffffff8110b26c>] sys_write+0x4c/0x80 > [<ffffffff81002dab>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
Does the patch at http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/ fix it?
Rafael
| |