[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1003021106330.4245@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 11:08:50 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: BUG: spinlock lockup on task_rq_lock in 2.6.33
Dave,
On Tue, 2 Mar 2010, Dave Chinner wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I just locked up a machine with the following trace:
>
> [ 5247.149256] BUG: spinlock lockup on CPU#1, dd/7018, ffff8800059d4380
> [ 5247.150009] BUG: spinlock lockup on CPU#0, dd/6211, ffff8800059d4380
> [ 5247.150009] Pid: 6211, comm: dd Not tainted 2.6.33-dgc #86
> [ 5247.150009] Call Trace:
> [ 5247.150009] [<ffffffff8140ad40>] do_raw_spin_lock+0x160/0x170
> [ 5247.150009] [<ffffffff8170fec6>] _raw_spin_lock+0x56/0x70
> [ 5247.150009] [<ffffffff8103d092>] ? task_rq_lock+0x52/0x90
> [ 5247.150009] [<ffffffff8103d092>] task_rq_lock+0x52/0x90
> [ 5247.150009] [<ffffffff81044a70>] try_to_wake_up+0x40/0x3d0
> [ 5247.150009] [<ffffffff81044e55>] wake_up_process+0x15/0x20
I can't say it for sure, but that might be related to a problem with
TASK_WAKING which we discovered recently. The fix is in linus tree
(commit 0970d2992dfd7d5ec2c787417cf464f01eeaf42a) and on the way to stable.
Thanks,
tglx
--
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