[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <9572737.16301396088574413.JavaMail.weblogic@epml02>
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 10:22:55 +0000 (GMT)
From: Jongman Heo <jongman.heo@...sung.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Subject: Re: Re: latest 3.14.0-rc8+ : "INFO: inconsistent lock state "
>
>
>------- Original Message -------
>
>Sender : Cong Wang<xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
>
>Date : 2014-03-29 13:23 (GMT+09:00)
>
>Title : Re: latest 3.14.0-rc8+ : "INFO: inconsistent lock state "
>
>
>
>On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 8:21 PM, Jongman Heo wrote:
>>
>> Hi, guys,
>>
>> With today's linus git tree, I got following messages;
>>
>> [ 97.426196] =================================
>> [ 97.426198] [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
>> [ 97.426221] 3.14.0-rc8+ #45 Tainted: G W
>> [ 97.426224] ---------------------------------
>> [ 97.426227] inconsistent {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} -> {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} usage.
>> [ 97.426229] kworker/7:1/101 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes:
>> [ 97.426231] (&addrconf_stats->syncp.seq){+.?...}, at: [] mld_send_initial_cr.part.30+0x81/0xa0
>> [ 97.426255] {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} state was registered at:
>> [ 97.426258] [] __lock_acquire+0x414/0x18e0
>> [ 97.426265] [] lock_acquire+0x98/0x120
>> [ 97.426268] [] mld_sendpack+0xdf/0x5b0
>> [ 97.426270] [] mld_ifc_timer_expire+0x191/0x2c0
>> [ 97.426272] [] call_timer_fn+0x75/0x160
>> [ 97.426276] [] run_timer_softirq+0x192/0x230
>> [ 97.426281] [] __do_softirq+0xfb/0x2b0
>> [ 97.426286] irq event stamp: 33365
>> [ 97.426289] hardirqs last enabled at (33365): [] __local_bh_enable_ip+0x6b/0xc0
>> [ 97.426292] hardirqs last disabled at (33363): [] __do_softirq+0x145/0x2b0
>> [ 97.426294] softirqs last enabled at (33364): [] __do_softirq+0x1a4/0x2b0
>> [ 97.426297] softirqs last disabled at (33341): [] do_softirq_own_stack+0x35/0x40
>> [ 97.426303]
>> other info that might help us debug this:
>> [ 97.426305] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>>
>> [ 97.426306] CPU0
>> [ 97.426307] ----
>> [ 97.426308] lock(&addrconf_stats->syncp.seq);
>> [ 97.426310]
>> [ 97.426311] lock(&addrconf_stats->syncp.seq);
>> [ 97.426313]
>> *** DEADLOCK ***
>
>Does the following patch help?
>
>diff --git a/net/ipv6/mcast.c b/net/ipv6/mcast.c
>index e1e4735..74a774a 100644
>--- a/net/ipv6/mcast.c
>+++ b/net/ipv6/mcast.c
>@@ -1588,7 +1588,7 @@ static void mld_sendpack(struct sk_buff *skb)
>
> rcu_read_lock();
> idev = __in6_dev_get(skb->dev);
>- IP6_UPD_PO_STATS(net, idev, IPSTATS_MIB_OUT, skb->len);
>+ IP6_UPD_PO_STATS_BH(net, idev, IPSTATS_MIB_OUT, skb->len);
>
> payload_len = (skb_tail_pointer(skb) - skb_network_header(skb)) -
> sizeof(*pip6);
>
>
>
Hi,
No, it doesn't fix the issue.
Regards,
Jongman Heo.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists