[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080916025204.GL5811@disturbed>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 12:52:04 +1000
From: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@...il.com>
Cc: rjw@...k.pl, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
xfs@....sgi.com
Subject: Re: 2.6.27-rc6: lockdep warning: iprune_mutex at
shrink_icache_memory+0x38/0x1a8
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 03:31:38AM +0400, Alexander Beregalov wrote:
> Hi
>
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 2.6.27-rc6-00034-gd1c6d2e #3
> -------------------------------------------------------
> nfsd/1766 is trying to acquire lock:
> (iprune_mutex){--..}, at: [<c01743fb>] shrink_icache_memory+0x38/0x1a8
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> (&(&ip->i_iolock)->mr_lock){----}, at: [<c021134f>]
> xfs_ilock+0xa2/0xd6
>
>
> I read files through nfs and saw delay for few seconds.
> System is x86_32, nfs, xfs.
> The last working kernel is 2.6.27-rc5,
> I do not know yet is it reproducible or not.
<sigh>
We need a FAQ for this one. It's a false positive. Google for an
explanation - I've explained it 4 or 5 times in the past year and
asked that the lockdep folk invent a special annotation for the
iprune_mutex (or memory reclaim) because of the way it can cause
recursion into the filesystem and hence invert lock orders without
causing deadlocks.....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists