[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220726104134.3b3awfphvafljdgp@bogus>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2022 11:41:34 +0100
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: [-next] Lockdep warnings
I was seeing the below lockdep warnings on my arm64 Juno development
platform almost 2 weeks back with -next. I wanted to check for similar
reports before post and forgot.
--->8
DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(lockdep_hardirqs_enabled())
hardirqs last enabled at (46157): cpuidle_enter_state+0x174/0x2b4
WARNING: CPU: 5 PID: 0 at kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5506 check_flags+0x90/0x1e8
hardirqs last disabled at (46158): el1_interrupt+0x2c/0xc8
Modules linked in:
softirqs last enabled at (46154): __do_softirq+0x2c0/0x388
softirqs last disabled at (46139): __irq_exit_rcu+0x118/0x18c
CPU: 5 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/5 Not tainted 5.19.0-rc6-next-20220714 #9
pstate: 600000c5 (nZCv daIF -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
pc : check_flags+0x90/0x1e8
lr : check_flags+0x90/0x1e8
Call trace:
check_flags+0x90/0x1e8
lock_is_held_type+0x80/0x164
rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x40/0x7c
trace_rcu_dyntick+0x5c/0x140
ct_kernel_enter+0x78/0xd4
ct_idle_exit+0x1c/0x44
cpu_idle_poll+0x74/0xb8
do_idle+0x90/0x2c4
cpu_startup_entry+0x30/0x34
secondary_start_kernel+0x130/0x144
__secondary_switched+0xb0/0xb4
irq event stamp: 64229
hardirqs last enabled at (64229): cpu_idle_poll+0x40/0xb8
hardirqs last disabled at (64228): do_idle+0xbc/0x2c4
softirqs last enabled at (64190): __do_softirq+0x2c0/0x388
softirqs last disabled at (64185): __irq_exit_rcu+0x118/0x18c
---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
possible reason: unannotated irqs-off.
irq event stamp: 64229
hardirqs last enabled at (64229): cpu_idle_poll+0x40/0xb8
hardirqs last disabled at (64228): do_idle+0xbc/0x2c4
softirqs last enabled at (64190): __do_softirq+0x2c0/0x388
softirqs last disabled at (64185): __irq_exit_rcu+0x118/0x18c
----
However I don't see the above warning with the latest -next. When I tried
yesterday's -next now, I see a different warning. Not sure if they are
related. I haven't tried to bisect.
--->8
=============================
[ BUG: Invalid wait context ]
5.19.0-rc8-next-20220725 #38 Not tainted
-----------------------------
swapper/0/0 is trying to lock:
(&drvdata->spinlock){....}-{3:3}, at: cti_cpu_pm_notify+0x54/0x114
other info that might help us debug this:
context-{5:5}
1 lock held by swapper/0/0:
#0: (cpu_pm_notifier.lock){....}-{2:2}, at: cpu_pm_enter+0x2c/0x80
stack backtrace:
CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.19.0-rc8-next-20220725-00004-g599e6691ed8c #38
Call trace:
dump_backtrace+0xe8/0x108
show_stack+0x18/0x4c
dump_stack_lvl+0x90/0xc8
dump_stack+0x18/0x54
__lock_acquire+0xa70/0x32d0
lock_acquire+0x160/0x308
_raw_spin_lock+0x60/0xa0
cti_cpu_pm_notify+0x54/0x114
raw_notifier_call_chain_robust+0x50/0xd4
cpu_pm_enter+0x48/0x80
psci_enter_idle_state+0x34/0x74
cpuidle_enter_state+0x120/0x2a8
cpuidle_enter+0x38/0x50
do_idle+0x1e8/0x2b8
cpu_startup_entry+0x24/0x28
kernel_init+0x0/0x1a0
start_kernel+0x0/0x470
start_kernel+0x34c/0x470
__primary_switched+0xbc/0xc4
----
--
Regards,
Sudeep
Powered by blists - more mailing lists