Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 6 Feb 2017 01:00:32 -0500 | From | Dave Jones <> | Subject | Re: Linux 4.10-rc7 |
| |
On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 03:41:54PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Hey, look at that - it's all been very quiet, and unless anything bad > happens, we're all back to the regular schedule with this being the > last rc.
..
> Christoph Hellwig (1): > nfsd: special case truncates some more
This one smells funny to me.
[ 145.983182] ============================================= [ 145.983201] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ] [ 145.983220] 4.10.0-rc7+ #1 Not tainted [ 145.983236] --------------------------------------------- [ 145.984868] nfsd/865 is trying to acquire lock: [ 145.986497] (sb_writers#7){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff9b1e0a25>] mnt_want_write+0x25/0x50 [ 145.988153] but task is already holding lock: [ 145.991350] (sb_writers#7){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff9b1e0a25>] mnt_want_write+0x25/0x50 [ 145.992931] other info that might help us debug this: [ 145.995991] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[ 145.998936] CPU0 [ 146.000358] ---- [ 146.001749] lock(sb_writers#7); [ 146.003109] lock(sb_writers#7); [ 146.004431] *** DEADLOCK ***
[ 146.008179] May be due to missing lock nesting notation
[ 146.010541] 1 lock held by nfsd/865: [ 146.011681] #0: (sb_writers#7){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff9b1e0a25>] mnt_want_write+0x25/0x50 [ 146.012820] stack backtrace: [ 146.015033] CPU: 0 PID: 865 Comm: nfsd Not tainted 4.10.0-rc7+ #1 [ 146.016147] Call Trace: [ 146.017225] dump_stack+0x68/0xa0 [ 146.018273] __lock_acquire+0x6ea/0x11d0 [ 146.019251] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0xef/0x1b0 [ 146.020119] lock_acquire+0x109/0x270 [ 146.020957] ? mnt_want_write+0x25/0x50 [ 146.021770] __sb_start_write+0xd8/0x230 [ 146.022555] ? mnt_want_write+0x25/0x50 [ 146.023313] ? nfsd_permission+0x7f/0x110 [ 146.024042] mnt_want_write+0x25/0x50 [ 146.024745] vfs_truncate+0x4e/0x200 [ 146.025421] nfsd_setattr+0x13a/0x300 [ 146.026070] nfsd4_setattr+0x109/0x130 [ 146.026690] nfsd4_proc_compound+0x443/0x6e0 [ 146.027286] nfsd_dispatch+0x91/0x170 [ 146.027853] svc_process+0x6e6/0xa00 [ 146.028393] nfsd+0x193/0x2a0 [ 146.028903] ? nfsd+0x5/0x2a0 [ 146.029448] kthread+0x111/0x150 [ 146.029964] ? nfsd_destroy+0x190/0x190 [ 146.030474] ? __kthread_create_on_node+0x250/0x250 [ 146.030988] ret_from_fork+0x2e/0x40
I'll double check that it's that commit in the morning, but nfs+truncate seems to point in this direction..
Dave
| |