From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Zdenek Kabelac <zdenek.kabelac@gmail.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: INFO: possible circular locking dependency at cleanup_workqueue_thread
Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 13:18:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1242559101.28127.63.camel@johannes.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090517071834.GA8507@elte.hu>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1866 bytes --]
On Sun, 2009-05-17 at 09:18 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Cc:s added. This dependency:
Not sure why you're not adding the cfg80211 maintainer if you think
cfg80211 causes the problem...
> > -> #2 (cfg80211_mutex){+.+.+.}:
> > [<ffffffff80271a64>] __lock_acquire+0xc64/0x10a0
> > [<ffffffff80271f38>] lock_acquire+0x98/0x140
> > [<ffffffff8054e78c>] __mutex_lock_common+0x4c/0x3b0
> > [<ffffffff8054ebf6>] mutex_lock_nested+0x46/0x60
> > [<ffffffffa007e66a>] reg_todo+0x19a/0x590 [cfg80211]
> > [<ffffffff80258f18>] worker_thread+0x1e8/0x3a0
> > [<ffffffff8025dc3a>] kthread+0x5a/0xa0
> > [<ffffffff8020d23a>] child_rip+0xa/0x20
>
> is what sets the dependencies upside down.
I'm also not sure how you arrived at that conclusion, I would be
interested to hear how you did. In any case, it's most definitely not
cfg80211 causing it.
Cf. this, almost identical, lockdep report for example:
http://paste.pocoo.org/show/116240/
The logical conclusion here would be to say that the rtnl is responsible
here...
As you can see from the report, the only thing cfg80211_mutex does is
register a device struct while holding it -- claiming cfg80211 (or rtnl
in the other report which behaves the same) responsibility here because
of that is totally ludicrous -- that would mean you've suddenly changed
all the locking rules so that you can no longer register devices under a
lock that you also need from a work struct executed due to
schedule_work().
I'm not entirely sure yet, but I would think the problem might be a
false positive in the workqueue code -- remember this report only
triggers because cleanup_workqueue_thread() acquires the fake lock for
the workqueue. Maybe it shouldn't do that from the CPU_POST_DEAD
notifier? Oleg, can you help me out here?
johannes
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-17 11:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-12 7:59 Zdenek Kabelac
2009-05-17 7:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-17 10:42 ` Ming Lei
2009-05-17 11:18 ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2009-05-17 13:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-18 19:47 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-05-18 20:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-18 20:16 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-05-18 20:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-18 22:14 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-05-19 9:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-19 10:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-19 14:53 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-05-19 8:51 ` Johannes Berg
2009-05-19 12:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-05-19 15:33 ` Johannes Berg
2009-05-19 16:09 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-05-19 16:27 ` Johannes Berg
2009-05-19 18:51 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-05-22 10:46 ` Johannes Berg
2009-05-22 22:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-23 8:21 ` Johannes Berg
2009-05-23 23:20 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-24 3:29 ` Ming Lei
2009-05-24 11:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-24 12:48 ` Ming Lei
2009-05-24 19:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-24 14:30 ` Alan Stern
2009-05-24 19:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-20 3:36 ` Ming Lei
2009-05-20 6:47 ` Johannes Berg
2009-05-20 7:09 ` Ming Lei
2009-05-20 7:12 ` Johannes Berg
2009-05-20 8:21 ` Ming Lei
2009-05-20 8:45 ` Johannes Berg
2009-05-22 8:03 ` Ming Lei
2009-05-22 8:11 ` Johannes Berg
2009-05-20 12:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-20 13:18 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-05-20 13:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-20 13:55 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-05-20 14:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-24 18:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1242559101.28127.63.camel@johannes.local \
--to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=zdenek.kabelac@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®