5.12-rc6 splat, MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS too low, Workqueue: btrfs-delalloc btrfs_work_helper

* 5.12-rc6 splat, MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS too low, Workqueue: btrfs-delalloc btrfs_work_helper
@ 2021-04-09 21:22 Chris Murphy
  0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Chris Murphy @ 2021-04-09 21:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Btrfs BTRFS

Got this while building bolt in a podman container. I've got reproduce
steps and test files here
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1948054

[ 3229.119497] overlayfs: upper fs does not support xattr, falling
back to index=off and metacopy=off.
[ 3229.155339] overlayfs: upper fs does not support xattr, falling
back to index=off and metacopy=off.
[ 3238.380647] BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS too low!
[ 3238.380654] turning off the locking correctness validator.
[ 3238.380656] Please attach the output of /proc/lock_stat to the bug report
[ 3238.380657] CPU: 4 PID: 9115 Comm: kworker/u16:20 Not tainted
5.12.0-0.rc6.184.fc35.x86_64+debug #1
[ 3238.380660] Hardware name: Apple Inc.
MacBookPro8,2/Mac-94245A3940C91C80, BIOS
MBP81.88Z.0050.B00.1804101331 04/10/18
[ 3238.380663] Workqueue: btrfs-delalloc btrfs_work_helper
[ 3238.380670] Call Trace:
[ 3238.380674]  dump_stack+0x7f/0xa1
[ 3238.380680]  __lock_acquire.cold+0x1a9/0x2bf
[ 3238.380686]  ? __lock_acquire+0x3ac/0x1e10
[ 3238.380691]  lock_acquire+0xc4/0x3a0
[ 3238.380695]  ? percpu_counter_add_batch+0x45/0x60
[ 3238.380699]  ? lock_acquire+0xc4/0x3a0
[ 3238.380702]  ? lock_is_held_type+0xa7/0x120
[ 3238.380706]  ? __set_page_dirty_nobuffers+0x6b/0x1e0
[ 3238.380711]  _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x4d/0x90
[ 3238.380715]  ? percpu_counter_add_batch+0x45/0x60
[ 3238.380718]  percpu_counter_add_batch+0x45/0x60
[ 3238.380721]  account_page_dirtied+0x102/0x320
[ 3238.380724]  __set_page_dirty_nobuffers+0xa2/0x1e0
[ 3238.380727]  set_extent_buffer_dirty+0x63/0x80
[ 3238.380732]  btrfs_mark_buffer_dirty+0x60/0x80
[ 3238.380737]  copy_for_split+0x29e/0x360
[ 3238.380741]  split_leaf+0x1c2/0x5e0
[ 3238.380746]  btrfs_search_slot+0x99a/0x9f0
[ 3238.380751]  btrfs_insert_empty_items+0x58/0xa0
[ 3238.380754]  cow_file_range_inline.constprop.0+0x1cf/0x760
[ 3238.380758]  ? __local_bh_enable_ip+0x82/0xd0
[ 3238.380762]  ? zstd_put_workspace+0x82/0x160
[ 3238.380765]  ? __local_bh_enable_ip+0x82/0xd0
[ 3238.380769]  compress_file_range+0x471/0x830
[ 3238.380774]  async_cow_start+0x12/0x30
[ 3238.380777]  ? submit_compressed_extents+0x410/0x410
[ 3238.380779]  btrfs_work_helper+0x105/0x400
[ 3238.380782]  ? lock_is_held_type+0xa7/0x120
[ 3238.380786]  process_one_work+0x2b0/0x5e0
[ 3238.380791]  worker_thread+0x55/0x3c0
[ 3238.380793]  ? process_one_work+0x5e0/0x5e0
[ 3238.380796]  kthread+0x13a/0x150
[ 3238.380799]  ? __kthread_bind_mask+0x60/0x60
[ 3238.380801]  ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30

The /proc/lock_stat is in the downstream bug as an attachment. There's
possibly three things going on here, the bogus overlayfs warning, the
lockdep bug, and the call trace with btrfs bits in it. No idea if they
are related.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] only message in thread