On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 08:29:14AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:12:18AM +0200, Sebastian Ott wrote: > >> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015, Felipe Balbi wrote: > >> > while booting AM437x device, the following splat > >> > triggered: > >> > > >> > [ 12.005238] =============================== > >> > [ 12.009749] [ INFO: suspicious RCU usage. ] > >> > [ 12.014116] 4.2.0-next-20150831 #1154 Not tainted > >> > [ 12.019050] ------------------------------- > >> > [ 12.023408] security/device_cgroup.c:405 device_cgroup:verify_new_ex called without proper synchronization! > >> > [ 12.033576] other info that might help us debug this: > >> > > >> > [ 12.041942] rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 0 > >> > [ 12.048796] 4 locks held by systemd/1: > >> > [ 12.052700] #0: (sb_writers#7){.+.+.+}, at: [] __sb_start_write+0x8c/0xb0 > >> > [ 12.060954] #1: (&of->mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [] kernfs_fop_write+0x50/0x1b8 > >> > [ 12.069085] #2: (s_active#30){++++.+}, at: [] kernfs_fop_write+0x58/0x1b8 > >> > [ 12.077310] #3: (devcgroup_mutex){+.+...}, at: [] devcgroup_access_write+0x20/0x658 > >> > [ 12.086575] stack backtrace: > >> > [ 12.091124] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: systemd Not tainted 4.2.0-next-20150831 #1154 > >> > [ 12.098609] Hardware name: Generic AM43 (Flattened Device Tree) > >> > [ 12.104807] [] (unwind_backtrace) from [] (show_stack+0x10/0x14) > >> > [ 12.112924] [] (show_stack) from [] (dump_stack+0x84/0x9c) > >> > [ 12.120491] [] (dump_stack) from [] (verify_new_ex+0xc4/0xdc) > >> > [ 12.128326] [] (verify_new_ex) from [] (devcgroup_access_write+0x374/0x658) > >> > [ 12.137426] [] (devcgroup_access_write) from [] (cgroup_file_write+0x28/0x1bc) > >> > [ 12.146796] [] (cgroup_file_write) from [] (kernfs_fop_write+0xc0/0x1b8) > >> > [ 12.155620] [] (kernfs_fop_write) from [] (__vfs_write+0x1c/0xd8) > >> > [ 12.163783] [] (__vfs_write) from [] (vfs_write+0x90/0x16c) > >> > [ 12.171426] [] (vfs_write) from [] (SyS_write+0x44/0x9c) > >> > [ 12.178806] [] (SyS_write) from [] (ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x1c) > >> > > >> > Fix it by making sure rcu_read_lock() is held > >> > around devcgroup_update_access(). > >> > >> With this patch applied I got the following: > >> > >> [ 4.079102] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at mm/slub.c:1266 > >> [ 4.079105] in_atomic(): 0, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 1, name: systemd > > > > that didn't trigger here. maybe I didn't have lock debugging enabled. > > I'll have a look. > > Did you happen to get a chance to poke further? I'm seeing the > original splat on all my machines as well. in today's TODO. -- balbi