From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753837AbXCTMM4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Mar 2007 08:12:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753733AbXCTMM4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Mar 2007 08:12:56 -0400 Received: from styx.suse.cz ([82.119.242.94]:36979 "EHLO duck.suse.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753836AbXCTMM4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Mar 2007 08:12:56 -0400 Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 13:19:09 +0100 From: Jan Kara To: Jarek Poplawski Cc: Folkert van Heusden , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Oleg Nesterov , Neil Brown , Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: dquot.c: possible circular locking Re: [2.6.20] BUG: workqueue leaked lock Message-ID: <20070320121909.GB14319@duck.suse.cz> References: <20070315191749.GS31960@vanheusden.com> <20070320111701.GB1751@ff.dom.local> <20070320112253.GC1751@ff.dom.local> <20070320113151.GA12462@ff.dom.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070320113151.GA12462@ff.dom.local> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue 20-03-07 12:31:51, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2007 at 12:22:53PM +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 20, 2007 at 12:17:01PM +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > > ... > > > IMHO lockdep found that two locks are taken in different order: > > > > > > -> #1: 1) tty_mutex in con_console() 2) dqptr_sem (somewhere later) > > > -> #0: 1) dqptr_sem 2) tty_console in dquot_alloc_space() with print_warning() > > Once more - should be: > -> #1: 1) tty_mutex in con_close() 2) dqptr_sem (somewhere later) > -> #0: 1) dqptr_sem 2) tty_mutex in dquot_alloc_space() with print_warning() Yes, I was looking at it. Hmm, we can possibly get rid of tty_mutex being acquired under dqptr_sem in quota code. But looking at the path from con_close() there's another inversion with i_mutex which is also acquired along the path for sysfs. And we can hardly get rid of it in the quota code. Now none of these is a real deadlock as quota should never call print_warning() for sysfs (it doesn't use quota) but still it's nasty. I suppose tty_mutex is above i_mutex because of those sysfs calls and it seems sysfs must be called under tty_mutex because of races with init_dev(). So it's not easy to get rid of that dependency either. Honza -- Jan Kara SuSE CR Labs