[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <4F3CC8F0-C37E-4448-AF65-796E643A301B@colorremedies.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 15:14:34 -0700
From: Chris Murphy <lists@...orremedies.com>
To: Tommi Rantala <tt.rantala@...il.com>
Cc: Chris Mason <clm@...com>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>,
linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
trinity@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: btrfs "possible irq lock inversion dependency detected"
On Feb 17, 2014, at 1:09 PM, Tommi Rantala <tt.rantala@...il.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Saw this while fuzzing the kernel with Trinity.
>
> Tommi
>
>
> [ 396.136048] =========================================================
> [ 396.136048] [ INFO: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected ]
> [ 396.136048] 3.14.0-rc3 #1 Not tainted
> [ 396.136048] ---------------------------------------------------------
> [ 396.136048] kswapd0/1482 just changed the state of lock:
> [ 396.136048] (&delayed_node->mutex){+.+.-.}, at: [<ffffffff8147b83b>] __btrfs_release_delayed_node+0x4b/0x1e0
> [ 396.136048] but this lock took another, RECLAIM_FS-unsafe lock in the past:
> [ 396.136048] (&found->groups_sem){+++++.}
Looks like this is the same thing previously report on Btrfs list with 3.14.0-rc1 here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062439
Which points to this:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062833#c24
Which points to this patch:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=139233546723342&q=raw
Chris Murphy--
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