You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Dave has reported the following lockdep splat:
=================================
[ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
3.11.0-rc1+ #9 Not tainted
---------------------------------
inconsistent {RECLAIM_FS-ON-W} -> {IN-RECLAIM_FS-W} usage.
kswapd0/49 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes:
(&mapping->i_mmap_mutex){+.+.?.}, at: [<c114971b>] page_referenced+0x87/0x5e3
{RECLAIM_FS-ON-W} state was registered at:
mark_held_locks+0x81/0xe7
lockdep_trace_alloc+0x5e/0xbc
__alloc_pages_nodemask+0x8b/0x9b6
__get_free_pages+0x20/0x31
get_zeroed_page+0x12/0x14
__pmd_alloc+0x1c/0x6b
huge_pmd_share+0x265/0x283
huge_pte_alloc+0x5d/0x71
hugetlb_fault+0x7c/0x64a
handle_mm_fault+0x255/0x299
__do_page_fault+0x142/0x55c
do_page_fault+0xd/0x16
error_code+0x6c/0x74
irq event stamp: 3136917
hardirqs last enabled at (3136917): _raw_spin_unlock_irq+0x27/0x50
hardirqs last disabled at (3136916): _raw_spin_lock_irq+0x15/0x78
softirqs last enabled at (3136180): __do_softirq+0x137/0x30f
softirqs last disabled at (3136175): irq_exit+0xa8/0xaa
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0
----
lock(&mapping->i_mmap_mutex);
<Interrupt>
lock(&mapping->i_mmap_mutex);
*** DEADLOCK ***
no locks held by kswapd0/49.
stack backtrace:
CPU: 1 PID: 49 Comm: kswapd0 Not tainted 3.11.0-rc1+ #9
Hardware name: Dell Inc. Precision WorkStation 490 /0DT031, BIOS A08 04/25/2008
Call Trace:
dump_stack+0x4b/0x79
print_usage_bug+0x1d9/0x1e3
mark_lock+0x1e0/0x261
__lock_acquire+0x623/0x17f2
lock_acquire+0x7d/0x195
mutex_lock_nested+0x6c/0x3a7
page_referenced+0x87/0x5e3
shrink_page_list+0x3d9/0x947
shrink_inactive_list+0x155/0x4cb
shrink_lruvec+0x300/0x5ce
shrink_zone+0x53/0x14e
kswapd+0x517/0xa75
kthread+0xa8/0xaa
ret_from_kernel_thread+0x1b/0x28
which is a false positive caused by hugetlb pmd sharing code which
allocates a new pmd from withing mapping->i_mmap_mutex. If this
allocation causes reclaim then the lockdep detector complains that we
might self-deadlock.
This is not correct though, because hugetlb pages are not reclaimable so
their mapping will be never touched from the reclaim path.
The patch tells lockup detector that hugetlb i_mmap_mutex is special by
assigning it a separate lockdep class so it won't report possible
deadlocks on unrelated mappings.
[[email protected]: comment for annotation]
Reported-by: Dave Jones <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Minchan Kim <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
0 commit comments