lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Oct]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: kvm+nouveau induced lockdep gripe
From
Date
On Sat, 2020-10-24 at 10:22 +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
>
> Looks like we can break the lock chain by moving ttm bo's release
> method out of mmap_lock, see diff below.

Ah, the perfect compliment to morning java, a patchlet to wedge in and
see what happens.

wedge/build/boot <schlurp... ahhh>

Mmm, box says no banana... a lot.

[ 30.456921] ================================
[ 30.456924] WARNING: inconsistent lock state
[ 30.456928] 5.9.0.gf11901e-master #2 Tainted: G S E
[ 30.456932] --------------------------------
[ 30.456935] inconsistent {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} -> {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} usage.
[ 30.456940] ksoftirqd/4/36 [HC0[0]:SC1[1]:HE1:SE0] takes:
[ 30.456944] ffff8e2c8bde9e40 (&mgr->vm_lock){++?+}-{2:2}, at: drm_vma_offset_remove+0x14/0x70 [drm]
[ 30.456976] {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} state was registered at:
[ 30.456982] lock_acquire+0x1a7/0x3b0
[ 30.456987] _raw_write_lock+0x2f/0x40
[ 30.457006] drm_vma_offset_add+0x1c/0x60 [drm]
[ 30.457013] ttm_bo_init_reserved+0x28b/0x460 [ttm]
[ 30.457020] ttm_bo_init+0x57/0x110 [ttm]
[ 30.457066] nouveau_bo_init+0xb0/0xc0 [nouveau]
[ 30.457108] nouveau_bo_new+0x4d/0x60 [nouveau]
[ 30.457145] nv84_fence_create+0xb9/0x130 [nouveau]
[ 30.457180] nvc0_fence_create+0xe/0x47 [nouveau]
[ 30.457221] nouveau_drm_device_init+0x3d9/0x800 [nouveau]
[ 30.457262] nouveau_drm_probe+0xfb/0x200 [nouveau]
[ 30.457268] local_pci_probe+0x42/0x90
[ 30.457272] pci_device_probe+0xe7/0x1a0
[ 30.457276] really_probe+0xf7/0x4d0
[ 30.457280] driver_probe_device+0x5d/0x140
[ 30.457284] device_driver_attach+0x4f/0x60
[ 30.457288] __driver_attach+0xa4/0x140
[ 30.457292] bus_for_each_dev+0x67/0x90
[ 30.457296] bus_add_driver+0x18c/0x230
[ 30.457299] driver_register+0x5b/0xf0
[ 30.457304] do_one_initcall+0x54/0x2f0
[ 30.457309] do_init_module+0x5b/0x21b
[ 30.457314] load_module+0x1e40/0x2370
[ 30.457317] __do_sys_finit_module+0x98/0xe0
[ 30.457321] do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
[ 30.457326] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
[ 30.457329] irq event stamp: 366850
[ 30.457335] hardirqs last enabled at (366850): [<ffffffffa11312ff>] rcu_nocb_unlock_irqrestore+0x4f/0x60
[ 30.457342] hardirqs last disabled at (366849): [<ffffffffa11384ef>] rcu_do_batch+0x59f/0x990
[ 30.457347] softirqs last enabled at (366834): [<ffffffffa1c002d7>] __do_softirq+0x2d7/0x4a4
[ 30.457357] softirqs last disabled at (366839): [<ffffffffa10928c2>] run_ksoftirqd+0x32/0x60
[ 30.457363]
other info that might help us debug this:
[ 30.457369] Possible unsafe locking scenario:

[ 30.457375] CPU0
[ 30.457378] ----
[ 30.457381] lock(&mgr->vm_lock);
[ 30.457386] <Interrupt>
[ 30.457389] lock(&mgr->vm_lock);
[ 30.457394]
*** DEADLOCK ***

<snips 999 lockdep lines and zillion ATOMIC_SLEEP gripes>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-10-24 05:40    [W:0.159 / U:0.320 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site