Re: 2.6.18-rc5-mm1 + all hotfixes -- INFO: possible recursive locking detected

["Miles Lane" <miles.lane@gmail.com>]

On 9/5/06, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 10:37:51 -0700
> "Miles Lane" <miles.lane@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > ieee1394: Node changed: 0-01:1023 -> 0-00:1023
> > ieee1394: Node changed: 0-02:1023 -> 0-01:1023
> > ieee1394: Node suspended: ID:BUS[0-00:1023]  GUID[0080880002103eae]
> >
> > =============================================
> > [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> > 2.6.18-rc5-mm1 #2
> > ---------------------------------------------
> > knodemgrd_0/2321 is trying to acquire lock:
> >  (&s->rwsem){----}, at: [<f8958897>] nodemgr_probe_ne+0x311/0x38d [ieee1394]
> >
> > but task is already holding lock:
> >  (&s->rwsem){----}, at: [<f8959078>] nodemgr_host_thread+0x717/0x883 [ieee1394]
> >
> > other info that might help us debug this:
> > 2 locks held by knodemgrd_0/2321:
> >  #0:  (nodemgr_serialize){--..}, at: [<c11e76cd>]
> > mutex_lock_interruptible+0x1c/0x21
> >  #1:  (&s->rwsem){----}, at: [<f8959078>]
> > nodemgr_host_thread+0x717/0x883 [ieee1394]
> >
> > stack backtrace:
> >  [<c1003c97>] dump_trace+0x69/0x1b7
> >  [<c1003dfa>] show_trace_log_lvl+0x15/0x28
> >  [<c10040f5>] show_trace+0x16/0x19
> >  [<c1004110>] dump_stack+0x18/0x1d
> >  [<c102f1e1>] __lock_acquire+0x7a2/0x9f8
> >  [<c102f70a>] lock_acquire+0x56/0x74
> >  [<c102b805>] down_write+0x27/0x41
> >  [<f8958897>] nodemgr_probe_ne+0x311/0x38d [ieee1394]
> >  [<f8959098>] nodemgr_host_thread+0x737/0x883 [ieee1394]
> >  [<c1028c19>] kthread+0xaf/0xde
> >  [<c100397b>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10
> > DWARF2 unwinder stuck at kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10
> >
> > Leftover inexact backtrace:
> >
> >  [<c1003dfa>] show_trace_log_lvl+0x15/0x28
> >  [<c10040f5>] show_trace+0x16/0x19
> >  [<c1004110>] dump_stack+0x18/0x1d
> >  [<c102f1e1>] __lock_acquire+0x7a2/0x9f8
> >  [<c102f70a>] lock_acquire+0x56/0x74
> >  [<c102b805>] down_write+0x27/0x41
> >  [<f8958897>] nodemgr_probe_ne+0x311/0x38d [ieee1394]
> >  [<f8959098>] nodemgr_host_thread+0x737/0x883 [ieee1394]
> >  [<c1028c19>] kthread+0xaf/0xde
> >  [<c100397b>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10
> >  =======================
> > ieee1394: Node resumed: ID:BUS[0-00:1023]  GUID[0080880002103eae]
> > ieee1394: Node changed: 0-00:1023 -> 0-01:1023
> > ieee1394: Node changed: 0-01:1023 -> 0-02:1023
>
> That's a 1394 glitch, possibly introduced by git-ieee1394.patch.

Would you like me to verify that removing the patch fixes it, or
should I wait for the 2.6.18-rc6-mm1 tree?

Thanks,
      Miles