[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1196937088.6788.56.camel@twins>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2007 11:31:28 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: suspend-related lockdep warning
On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 01:21 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, 4 of December 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > [ 34.455096] ipw2200: Failed to send WEP_KEY: Command timed out.
> > [ 34.911876] Syncing filesystems ... done.
> > [ 34.934526] Freezing user space processes ... WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2662 check_flags()
> > [ 34.934917] Pid: 1922, comm: dbus-daemon Not tainted 2.6.24-rc3-mm3 #2
> > [ 34.935036] [<c0104853>] show_trace_log_lvl+0x12/0x25
> > [ 34.935142] [<c010506c>] show_trace+0xd/0x10
> > [ 34.935231] [<c0105850>] dump_stack+0x55/0x5d
> > [ 34.935322] [<c0136125>] check_flags+0x7f/0x11a
> > [ 34.935417] [<c0139210>] lock_acquire+0x3a/0x86
> > [ 34.935511] [<c0318faf>] _spin_lock+0x1c/0x49
> > [ 34.935603] [<c0140fc7>] refrigerator+0x13/0xc8
> > [ 34.935697] [<c01270ac>] get_signal_to_deliver+0x34/0x2e8
> > [ 34.935807] [<c0102edc>] do_notify_resume+0x8c/0x6fe
> > [ 34.935907] [<c0103a2c>] work_notifysig+0x13/0x1b
> > [ 34.936004] =======================
> > [ 34.936072] irq event stamp: 253
> > [ 34.936133] hardirqs last enabled at (253): [<c0103a8d>] syscall_exit_work+0x11/0x26
> > [ 34.936294] hardirqs last disabled at (252): [<c0103956>] syscall_exit+0x14/0x25
> > [ 34.936446] softirqs last enabled at (0): [<c011baf9>] copy_process+0x300/0x1246
> > [ 34.936599] softirqs last disabled at (0): [<00000000>] 0x0
> > [ 34.954308] (elapsed 0.01 seconds) done.
> > [ 34.954389] Freezing remaining freezable tasks ... (elapsed 0.00 seconds) done.
>
> Hmm, do I understand correctly that lockdep expects us to disable interrupts
> before acquiring the task lock in refrigerator()? That would be strange.
>
> Ingo, can you have a look at this, please?
No its complaining that the IRQ state changed without anybody telling it
about it. Usually an unannotated cli/sti.
The particular line it warns, (lockdep.c:2662), suggests...
/me grabs a copy of 24-rc3-mm2
... that hardirqs are disabled, but irq tracking thinks they are still
enabled. So that would be an unannotated cli.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (190 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists