From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail143.messagelabs.com (mail143.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E969C6B007E for ; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 17:34:34 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 23:34:21 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: possible recursive locking detected cache_alloc_refill() + cache_flusharray() In-Reply-To: <20110716211850.GA23917@breakpoint.cc> Message-ID: References: <20110716211850.GA23917@breakpoint.cc> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Sebastian Siewior Cc: Christoph Lameter , Pekka Enberg , Matt Mackall , linux-mm@kvack.org, Peter Zijlstra On Sat, 16 Jul 2011, Sebastian Siewior wrote: > Hi, > > just hit the following with full debuging turned on: > > | ============================================= > | [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ] > | 3.0.0-rc7-00088-g1765a36 #64 > | --------------------------------------------- > | udevd/1054 is trying to acquire lock: > | (&(&parent->list_lock)->rlock){..-...}, at: [] cache_alloc_refill+0xac/0x868 > | > | but task is already holding lock: > | (&(&parent->list_lock)->rlock){..-...}, at: [] cache_flusharray+0x58/0x148 > | > | other info that might help us debug this: > | Possible unsafe locking scenario: > | > | CPU0 > | ---- > | lock(&(&parent->list_lock)->rlock); > | lock(&(&parent->list_lock)->rlock); Known problem. Pekka is looking into it. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org