From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
To: cpufreq@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: cpufreq: circular lock dependency
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 22:08:33 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <tkrat.91982a9a79eb3b59@s5r6.in-berlin.de> (raw)
Google says this is an old bug.
Got it today when I switched from ondemand to performance by
# echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_governor
for each of cpu0,1,2,3.
=======================================================
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
2.6.36-rc7 #8
-------------------------------------------------------
cpufreq-hi/11879 is trying to acquire lock:
(s_active#93){++++.+}, at: [<ffffffff810f9314>] sysfs_hash_and_remove+0x53/0x77
but task is already holding lock:
(dbs_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffa0235f5b>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x372/0x423 [cpufreq_ondemand]
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #2 (dbs_mutex){+.+.+.}:
[<ffffffff8105c704>] lock_acquire+0x5a/0x71
[<ffffffff8133f214>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5c/0x2fa
[<ffffffffa0235c67>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x7e/0x423 [cpufreq_ondemand]
[<ffffffff812b6d23>] __cpufreq_governor+0xaa/0xe7
[<ffffffff812b6e64>] __cpufreq_set_policy+0x104/0x142
[<ffffffff812b878f>] store_scaling_governor+0x185/0x1c5
[<ffffffff812b7d0d>] store+0x5f/0x84
[<ffffffff810f9b00>] sysfs_write_file+0xf1/0x126
[<ffffffff810ac246>] vfs_write+0xae/0x135
[<ffffffff810ac391>] sys_write+0x47/0x6e
[<ffffffff8100202b>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
-> #1 (&per_cpu(cpu_policy_rwsem, cpu)){+.+.+.}:
[<ffffffff8105c704>] lock_acquire+0x5a/0x71
[<ffffffff8133f74a>] down_write+0x3f/0x60
[<ffffffff812b6bee>] lock_policy_rwsem_write+0x48/0x78
[<ffffffff812b7cee>] store+0x40/0x84
[<ffffffff810f9b00>] sysfs_write_file+0xf1/0x126
[<ffffffff810ac246>] vfs_write+0xae/0x135
[<ffffffff810ac391>] sys_write+0x47/0x6e
[<ffffffff8100202b>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
-> #0 (s_active#93){++++.+}:
[<ffffffff8105bfe7>] __lock_acquire+0x1169/0x182c
[<ffffffff8105c704>] lock_acquire+0x5a/0x71
[<ffffffff810fafcb>] sysfs_addrm_finish+0xd0/0x13f
[<ffffffff810f9314>] sysfs_hash_and_remove+0x53/0x77
[<ffffffff810fc324>] sysfs_remove_group+0x90/0xc8
[<ffffffffa0235f72>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x389/0x423 [cpufreq_ondemand]
[<ffffffff812b6d23>] __cpufreq_governor+0xaa/0xe7
[<ffffffff812b6e4e>] __cpufreq_set_policy+0xee/0x142
[<ffffffff812b878f>] store_scaling_governor+0x185/0x1c5
[<ffffffff812b7d0d>] store+0x5f/0x84
[<ffffffff810f9b00>] sysfs_write_file+0xf1/0x126
[<ffffffff810ac246>] vfs_write+0xae/0x135
[<ffffffff810ac391>] sys_write+0x47/0x6e
[<ffffffff8100202b>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
other info that might help us debug this:
4 locks held by cpufreq-hi/11879:
#0: (&buffer->mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff810f9a48>] sysfs_write_file+0x39/0x126
#1: (s_active#92){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff810f9ae5>] sysfs_write_file+0xd6/0x126
#2: (&per_cpu(cpu_policy_rwsem, cpu)){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff812b6bee>] lock_policy_rwsem_write+0x48/0x78
#3: (dbs_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffffa0235f5b>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x372/0x423 [cpufreq_ondemand]
stack backtrace:
Pid: 11879, comm: cpufreq-hi Not tainted 2.6.36-rc7 #8
Call Trace:
[<ffffffff8105a93c>] print_circular_bug+0xb3/0xc2
[<ffffffff8105bfe7>] __lock_acquire+0x1169/0x182c
[<ffffffff8102c70c>] ? get_parent_ip+0x11/0x42
[<ffffffff81058be7>] ? lockdep_init_map+0x9f/0x4fe
[<ffffffff8105c704>] lock_acquire+0x5a/0x71
[<ffffffff810f9314>] ? sysfs_hash_and_remove+0x53/0x77
[<ffffffff8104bc6d>] ? __init_waitqueue_head+0x35/0x48
[<ffffffff810fafcb>] sysfs_addrm_finish+0xd0/0x13f
[<ffffffff810f9314>] ? sysfs_hash_and_remove+0x53/0x77
[<ffffffff8133f45b>] ? mutex_lock_nested+0x2a3/0x2fa
[<ffffffff8105a007>] ? mark_held_locks+0x4d/0x6b
[<ffffffff810f9314>] sysfs_hash_and_remove+0x53/0x77
[<ffffffff810fc324>] sysfs_remove_group+0x90/0xc8
[<ffffffffa0235f72>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x389/0x423 [cpufreq_ondemand]
[<ffffffff8104f76a>] ? up_read+0x1e/0x38
[<ffffffff8102c70c>] ? get_parent_ip+0x11/0x42
[<ffffffff812b6d23>] __cpufreq_governor+0xaa/0xe7
[<ffffffff812b6e4e>] __cpufreq_set_policy+0xee/0x142
[<ffffffff812b878f>] store_scaling_governor+0x185/0x1c5
[<ffffffff812b85bd>] ? handle_update+0x0/0xe
[<ffffffff8133f74a>] ? down_write+0x3f/0x60
[<ffffffff812b7d0d>] store+0x5f/0x84
[<ffffffff810f9b00>] sysfs_write_file+0xf1/0x126
[<ffffffff810ac246>] vfs_write+0xae/0x135
[<ffffffff810ac391>] sys_write+0x47/0x6e
[<ffffffff8100202b>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-==-=- =-=- -====
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
reply other threads:[~2010-10-15 20:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=tkrat.91982a9a79eb3b59@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
--to=stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
--cc=cpufreq@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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®