On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 23:13:54 +0000 (GMT) William Heimbigner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On running "pktsetup 0 /dev/hdd", I get the following:
>
> [ 3970.461403] =============================================
> [ 3970.482051] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> [ 3970.498210] 2.6.21-rc7 #2
> [ 3970.506062] ---------------------------------------------
> [ 3970.522228] vol_id/8686 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 3970.536576] (&bdev->bd_mutex){--..}, at: [<c01826b2>] do_open+0x65/0x285
> [ 3970.557104]
> [ 3970.557109] but task is already holding lock:
> [ 3970.574627] (&bdev->bd_mutex){--..}, at: [<c01826b2>] do_open+0x65/0x285
> [ 3970.595160]
> [ 3970.595161] other info that might help us debug this:
> [ 3970.614757] 2 locks held by vol_id/8686:
> [ 3970.626505] #0: (&bdev->bd_mutex){--..}, at: [<c01826b2>]
> do_open+0x65/0x285
> [ 3970.648388] #1: (&ctl_mutex#2){--..}, at: [<c03d6b54>]
> mutex_lock+0x1c/0x1f
> [ 3970.670065]
> [ 3970.670070] stack backtrace:
> [ 3970.683165] [<c0104df5>] show_trace_log_lvl+0x1a/0x2f
> [ 3970.698604] [<c010544b>] show_trace+0x12/0x14
> [ 3970.711964] [<c01054fd>] dump_stack+0x16/0x18
> [ 3970.725322] [<c013150a>] __lock_acquire+0x12e/0xb93
> [ 3970.740243] [<c0131fd7>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x82
> [ 3970.754122] [<c03d6c46>] mutex_lock_nested+0xef/0x275
> [ 3970.769560] [<c01826b2>] do_open+0x65/0x285
> [ 3970.782397] [<c0182945>] __blkdev_get+0x73/0x7e
> [ 3970.796279] [<c0182965>] blkdev_get+0x15/0x17
> [ 3970.809638] [<c027dbde>] pkt_open+0x95/0xc4e
> [ 3970.822737] [<c01826e1>] do_open+0x94/0x285
> [ 3970.835578] [<c0182a93>] blkdev_open+0x28/0x51
> [ 3970.849196] [<c0161918>] __dentry_open+0xff/0x1b1
> [ 3970.863594] [<c0161a4b>] nameidata_to_filp+0x27/0x37
> [ 3970.878770] [<c0161a8e>] do_filp_open+0x33/0x3b
> [ 3970.892654] [<c0161ad9>] do_sys_open+0x43/0xc2
> [ 3970.906274] [<c0161b90>] sys_open+0x1c/0x1e
> [ 3970.919113] [<c0103e24>] sysenter_past_esp+0x5d/0x99
> [ 3970.934292] =======================
> [ 3971.630710] pktcdvd: pkt_get_last_written failed
> [ 3971.645027] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
> virtual address 0000000e
> [ 3971.670652] printing eip:
> [ 3971.678786] c0161aef
> [ 3971.685361] *pde = 00000000
> [ 3971.693761] Oops: 0000 [#1]
> [ 3971.702120] PREEMPT
> [ 3971.708722] Modules linked in: udf snd_intel8x0 snd_ac97_codec ac97_bus
> i810_audio ac97_codec 8139cp 8139too iTCO_wdt
> [ 3971.741005] CPU: 0
> [ 3971.741006] EIP: 0060:[<c0161aef>] Not tainted VLI
> [ 3971.741008] EFLAGS: 00010203 (2.6.21-rc7 #2)
> [ 3971.777034] EIP is at do_sys_open+0x59/0xc2
> [ 3971.789555] eax: 00000002 ebx: 00008000 ecx: c0182a6b edx: dc8df650
> [ 3971.809878] esi: ffffff9c edi: 00000002 ebp: de336fa4 esp: de336f88
> [ 3971.830200] ds: 007b es: 007b fs: 00d8 gs: 0033 ss: 0068
> [ 3971.847674] Process vol_id (pid: 8686, ti=de336000 task=d0b90de0
> task.ti=de336000)
> [ 3971.869812] Stack: 00000000 00000000 cef97000 00000003 bf9d7f65 00008000
> b7facff4 de336fb0
> [ 3971.895286] c0161b90 00000000 de336000 c0103e24 bf9d7f65 00008000
> 00000000 00008000
> [ 3971.920755] b7facff4 bf9d5e08 00000005 0000007b 0000007b 00000000
> 00000005 ffffe410
> [ 3971.946228] Call Trace:
> [ 3971.954126] [<c0104df5>] show_trace_log_lvl+0x1a/0x2f
> [ 3971.969563] [<c0104ea7>] show_stack_log_lvl+0x9d/0xa5
> [ 3971.985004] [<c01050aa>] show_registers+0x1fb/0x33c
> [ 3971.999924] [<c01052f2>] die+0x107/0x21f
> [ 3972.011984] [<c03d9d20>] do_page_fault+0x448/0x520
> [ 3972.026644] [<c03d8594>] error_code+0x74/0x7c
> [ 3972.040003] [<c0161b90>] sys_open+0x1c/0x1e
> [ 3972.052841] [<c0103e24>] sysenter_past_esp+0x5d/0x99
> [ 3972.068022] =======================
> [ 3972.078728] Code: f0 78 7e 8b 45 08 89 d9 8b 55 ec 89 04 24 89 f0 e8 82 ff
> ff ff 3d 00 f0 ff ff 89 c7 76 0d 8b 45 f0 e8 dc fb ff ff 89 7d f0 eb 56 <8b>
> 40 0c bb 20 00 00 40 8b 70 30 0f b7 56 66 81 e2 00 f0 00 00
> [ 3972.138557] EIP: [<c0161aef>] do_sys_open+0x59/0xc2 SS:ESP 0068:de336f88
>
> Is this a bug?
>
It certainly is. Are you able to identify an earlier kernel in which this
didn't happen? 2.6.20? An earlier 2.6.21-rcX?
Thanks.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
