On 07/07/2014 06:47 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: > On 07/07/2014 04:05 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> > On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 09:55:43AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: >>> >> I've also had this one, which looks similar: >>> >> >>> >> [10375.005884] BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#0, modprobe/10965 >>> >> [10375.006573] lock: 0xffff8803a0fd7740, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: >>> >> modprobe/10965, .owner_cpu: 15 [10375.007412] CPU: 0 PID: 10965 Comm: >>> >> modprobe Tainted: G W >>> >> 3.16.0-rc3-next-20140704-sasha-00023-g26c0906-dirty #765 >> > >> > Something's fucked; so we have: >> > >> > debug_spin_lock_before() SPIN_BUG_ON(lock->owner == current, "recursion"); >> > >> > Causing that, _HOWEVER_ look at .owner_cpu and the reporting cpu!! How can >> > the lock owner, own the lock on cpu 15 and again contend with it on CPU 0. >> > That's impossible. >> > >> > About when-ish did you start seeing things like this? Lemme go stare hard >> > at recent changes. >> > > ~next-20140704 I guess, about when I reported the original issue.
Just wanted to add that this is still going on in -next: [ 860.050433] BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#33, trinity-subchil/21438 [ 860.051572] lock: 0xffff8805fee10080, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: trinity-subchil/21438, .owner_cpu: -1 [ 860.052943] CPU: 33 PID: 21438 Comm: trinity-subchil Not tainted 3.16.0-rc7-next-20140728-sasha-00029-ge067ff9 #976 [ 860.053998] ffff8805fee10080 ffff8805fe72bab0 ffffffffad464226 ffff8805ba163000 [ 860.054820] ffff8805fe72bad0 ffffffffaa1d7e76 ffff8805fee10080 ffffffffae88d599 [ 860.055641] ffff8805fe72baf0 ffffffffaa1d7ef6 ffff8805fee10080 ffff8805fee10080 [ 860.056485] Call Trace: [ 860.056818] [<ffffffffad464226>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x7a [ 860.057788] [<ffffffffaa1d7e76>] spin_dump+0x86/0xe0 [ 860.058620] [<ffffffffaa1d7ef6>] spin_bug+0x26/0x30 [ 860.059487] [<ffffffffaa1d80bf>] do_raw_spin_lock+0x14f/0x1b0 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffad4a9f01>] _raw_spin_lock+0x61/0x80 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa1b4832>] ? load_balance+0x3a2/0xa50 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa1b4832>] load_balance+0x3a2/0xa50 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa1b541f>] pick_next_task_fair+0x53f/0xb00 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa1b5300>] ? pick_next_task_fair+0x420/0xb00 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffad4a89ab>] __schedule+0x16b/0x8c0 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa2dbf18>] ? unlink_file_vma+0x38/0x60 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa1a1903>] schedule_preempt_disabled+0x33/0x80 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa1c633e>] mutex_lock_nested+0x1ae/0x620 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa2dbf18>] ? unlink_file_vma+0x38/0x60 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa2dbf18>] unlink_file_vma+0x38/0x60 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa2d2b70>] free_pgtables+0xb0/0x130 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa2df0d4>] exit_mmap+0xc4/0x180 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa168aa3>] mmput+0x73/0x110 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa16fa9a>] do_exit+0x2ca/0xc80 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa1cecdb>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0xfb/0x280 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa1cee6d>] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xd/0x10 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa1704de>] do_group_exit+0x4e/0xe0 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffaa170584>] SyS_exit_group+0x14/0x20 [ 860.060318] [<ffffffffad4ab593>] tracesys+0xe1/0xe6 Thanks, Sasha -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
