From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757427Ab0ITVEC (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Sep 2010 17:04:02 -0400 Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:52321 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756160Ab0ITVEA (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Sep 2010 17:04:00 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Stefan Richter Subject: Re: [Bug #17752] 2.6.36-rc3: inconsistent lock state (iprune_sem, shrink_icache_memory) Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 23:03:04 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.36-rc4-rjw+; KDE/4.4.4; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Maciej Rutecki , Florian Mickler References: <1fwtoy8sG5H.A.veG.9D7lMB@chimera> <4C97C7EC.5070907@s5r6.in-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: <4C97C7EC.5070907@s5r6.in-berlin.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201009202303.04793.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday, September 20, 2010, Stefan Richter wrote: > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report > > of recent regressions. > > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions > > from 2.6.35. Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team > > know (either way). > > > > > > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17752 > > Subject : 2.6.36-rc3: inconsistent lock state (iprune_sem, shrink_icache_memory) > > Submitter : Stefan Richter > > Date : 2010-09-01 6:37 (20 days old) > > Message-ID : > > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=128332308528119&w=2 > > I think this should not be marked as a regression. See the older reports of > very similar issues (in my LKML mail from September 3, logged in bugzilla in > comment #1) > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/1/15/76 (2.6.33-rc, xfs involved) > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/1/18/108 (2.6.32.y, ntfs involved) > and hch's analysis in the first of these two threads > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/1/19/267 (several filesystems and > other code paths) > So, unless my trace was a code path that only newly acquired that oldproblem > of other code paths, this is an older issue. Alas this is not obvious to me > at least from the log that I got. > > I did not have lockdep enabled on the machine which delivered the log during > the last few months or so; I just remembered to re-enable it at the occasion > of switching to 2.6.36-rc. Thanks a lot for the info, I've dropped this bug from the list of recent regressions. Rafael From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [Bug #17752] 2.6.36-rc3: inconsistent lock state (iprune_sem, shrink_icache_memory) Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 23:03:04 +0200 Message-ID: <201009202303.04793.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <1fwtoy8sG5H.A.veG.9D7lMB@chimera> <4C97C7EC.5070907@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4C97C7EC.5070907-MtYdepGKPcBMYopoZt5u/LNAH6kLmebB@public.gmane.org> Sender: kernel-testers-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Stefan Richter Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Maciej Rutecki , Florian Mickler On Monday, September 20, 2010, Stefan Richter wrote: > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report > > of recent regressions. > > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions > > from 2.6.35. Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team > > know (either way). > > > > > > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17752 > > Subject : 2.6.36-rc3: inconsistent lock state (iprune_sem, shrink_icache_memory) > > Submitter : Stefan Richter > > Date : 2010-09-01 6:37 (20 days old) > > Message-ID : > > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=128332308528119&w=2 > > I think this should not be marked as a regression. See the older reports of > very similar issues (in my LKML mail from September 3, logged in bugzilla in > comment #1) > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/1/15/76 (2.6.33-rc, xfs involved) > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/1/18/108 (2.6.32.y, ntfs involved) > and hch's analysis in the first of these two threads > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/1/19/267 (several filesystems and > other code paths) > So, unless my trace was a code path that only newly acquired that oldproblem > of other code paths, this is an older issue. Alas this is not obvious to me > at least from the log that I got. > > I did not have lockdep enabled on the machine which delivered the log during > the last few months or so; I just remembered to re-enable it at the occasion > of switching to 2.6.36-rc. Thanks a lot for the info, I've dropped this bug from the list of recent regressions. Rafael