[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50A2A6DE.4030305@suse.cz>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 21:00:30 +0100
From: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
To: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>
CC: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: tty_ldisc_hangup: waiting (init) for ttyS0 took too long, but
we keep waiting...
On 11/10/2012 05:46 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm seeing lots of cases when my fuzzing session hangs with a message that
> starts with:
>
> [ 104.670841] tty_ldisc_hangup: waiting (init) for ttyS0 took too long, but we keep waiting...
>
> And continues with a hung task spew, such as:
>
> [ 242.990329] INFO: task init:1 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> [ 242.990955] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> [ 242.991527] init D ffff8800132c0000 3408 1 0 0x00000002
> [ 242.992156] ffff88001327dc18 0000000000000002 ffff88001327dbd8 ffffffff81152f95
> [ 242.992784] ffff880013280000 ffff88001327dfd8 ffff88001327dfd8 ffff88001327dfd8
> [ 242.994200] ffff8800132c0000 ffff880013280000 ffff880013280910 7fffffffffffffff
> [ 242.995780] Call Trace:
> [ 242.996429] [<ffffffff81152f95>] ? sched_clock_local+0x25/0xa0
> [ 242.997704] [<ffffffff83bdf065>] schedule+0x55/0x60
> [ 242.999864] [<ffffffff83bdcea5>] schedule_timeout+0x45/0x360
> [ 243.008415] [<ffffffff83be077d>] ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x5d/0xb0
> [ 243.008980] [<ffffffff8117ff8d>] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xd/0x10
> [ 243.009756] [<ffffffff83be07a4>] ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x84/0xb0
> [ 243.010662] [<ffffffff81139e17>] ? prepare_to_wait+0x77/0x90
> [ 243.011452] [<ffffffff81bb7a56>] tty_ldisc_wait_idle.isra.6+0x76/0xb0
> [ 243.012314] [<ffffffff81139ff0>] ? abort_exclusive_wait+0xb0/0xb0
> [ 243.013157] [<ffffffff81bb83bb>] tty_ldisc_hangup+0x1cb/0x320
> [ 243.013927] [<ffffffff81baf712>] ? __tty_hangup+0x122/0x430
> [ 243.014687] [<ffffffff81baf71a>] __tty_hangup+0x12a/0x430
> [ 243.015410] [<ffffffff83be07a4>] ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x84/0xb0
> [ 243.016321] [<ffffffff81bb187a>] disassociate_ctty+0x6a/0x230
> [ 243.017112] [<ffffffff811107fa>] do_exit+0x4ea/0xbd0
> [ 243.017793] [<ffffffff811ccc65>] ? rcu_user_exit+0xc5/0xf0
> [ 243.018549] [<ffffffff8117ff8d>] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xd/0x10
> [ 243.019339] [<ffffffff81110fa4>] do_group_exit+0x84/0xd0
> [ 243.020109] [<ffffffff81111002>] sys_exit_group+0x12/0x20
> [ 243.020815] [<ffffffff83be2298>] tracesys+0xe1/0xe6
> [ 243.021607] 1 lock held by init/1:
> [ 243.022079] #0: (&tty->ldisc_mutex){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff81bb8312>] tty_ldisc_hangup+0x122/0x320
>
> All of this on latest -next, inside a KVM tools guest.
>
> Help appreciated.
Hi, for me this looks like a false positive. The TTY layer just waits
for the process sitting on the TTY to vanish. Maybe we should touch the
watchdogs?
thanks,
--
js
suse labs
--
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