[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1305142319310.17873@pobox.suse.cz>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 23:23:39 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT] HID
On Tue, 14 May 2013, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > FYI, there's a new HID related lockdep and RCU splat upstream, probably
> > > relatd to the debugfs locking fixes:
> > >
> > > [ 79.088631] ======================================================
> > > [ 79.088631] [ INFO: HARDIRQ-safe -> HARDIRQ-unsafe lock order detected ]
> > > [ 79.088631] 3.9.0-13694-g7cf229a-dirty #224212 Tainted: G W
> > > [ 79.088631] ------------------------------------------------------
> > > [ 79.088631] swapper/0/1 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire:
> > > [ 79.088631] (&hdev->debug_list_lock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff82e510d9>] hid_debug_event+0x2e/0xd0
> > > [ 79.088631]
> > >
> > > See the full bootlog below. It's from an allyesconfig x86-64 bootup log.
> >
> > Hi Ingo,
> >
> > thanks for the report. I have a fix for this in my tree already and am
> > going to send pull request to Linus shortly.
>
> FYI, the fixes in your tree apparently did not fix the bug - I'm still
> getting the same lockdep splat below.
Hi Ingo,
which Linus' git tree topmost commit is that? The lockdep splat seems
highly suspicious to me, because:
[ ... snip ... ]
> and this task is already holding:
> (&(&usbhid->lock)->rlock){-.....}, at: [<c1bc08e4>] usb_hidinput_input_event+0x7c/0xaf
> which would create a new lock dependency:
> (&(&usbhid->lock)->rlock){-.....} -> (&hdev->debug_list_lock){+.+...}
>
> but this new dependency connects a HARDIRQ-irq-safe lock:
> (&(&usbhid->lock)->rlock){-.....}
> ... which became HARDIRQ-irq-safe at:
> [<c106974e>] __lock_acquire+0x241/0xd54
> [<c106a662>] lock_acquire+0x76/0x8a
> [<c1dbe21a>] _raw_spin_lock+0x3d/0x4a
> [<c1bc0764>] hid_ctrl+0x28/0x12c
> [<c19bfcec>] usb_hcd_giveback_urb+0x40/0x84
> [<c19e15cc>] finish_urb+0xbe/0xf4
> [<c19e163b>] takeback_td+0x39/0x99
> [<c19e1850>] dl_done_list+0x1b5/0x1e4
> [<c19e28a1>] ohci_irq+0x16c/0x27a
> [<c19bf46d>] usb_hcd_irq+0x26/0x4f
> [<c1088cc2>] handle_irq_event_percpu+0x24/0x11f
> [<c1088de9>] handle_irq_event+0x2c/0x43
> [<c108ad05>] handle_fasteoi_irq+0x6a/0x97
>
> to a HARDIRQ-irq-unsafe lock:
> (&hdev->debug_list_lock){+.+...}
> ... which became HARDIRQ-irq-unsafe at:
> ... [<c10697b1>] __lock_acquire+0x2a4/0xd54
> [<c106a662>] lock_acquire+0x76/0x8a
> [<c1dbc602>] __mutex_lock_common+0x4f/0x36f
> [<c1dbc960>] mutex_lock_nested+0x3e/0x44
> [<c1ba316b>] hid_debug_event+0x1e/0xa8
.. this is odd. In current Linus' tree we have
spin_lock_irqsave(&hdev->debug_list_lock, flags);
in hid_debug_event(), as commit 1deb9d341d turned debug_list_lock from
mutex to spinlock, but the trace implies that your kernel is trying to
acquire mutex.
Could you please check that you are running kernel which contains
1deb9d341d?
$ git describe --contains 1deb9d341d475
v3.10-rc1~13^2
On Linus' tree.
Thanks,
--
Jiri Kosina
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