On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 15:02:23 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [off-list ref] wrote:

On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 14:47 -0700, Zach Brown wrote:

quoted

Peter, do you have any interest in seeing how far we can get
at tracking lock_page()?  I'm not holding my breath, but any little bit
would probably help.

Would this be a valid report? 

( /me goes hunt a x86_64 unwinder patch that will apply to this tree.
  These stacktraces are pain )

They are.  lockdep reports are a pain too.  It's still a struggle to
understand wtf they're trying to tell you.  Mabe it's just me.

=======================================================
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
[ 2.6.22-rt3-dirty #34
-------------------------------------------------------
mount/1296 is trying to acquire lock:
 (&ei->truncate_mutex){--..}, at: [<ffffffff802f75e5>] ext3_get_blocks_handle+0x1a4/0x8f7

but task is already holding lock:
 (lock_page_0){--..}, at: [<ffffffff80267107>] generic_file_buffered_write+0x1ee/0x646

which lock already depends on the new lock.


the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #1 (lock_page_0){--..}:
       [<ffffffff80251b26>] __lock_acquire+0xa72/0xc35
       [<ffffffff802520c9>] lock_acquire+0x48/0x61
       [<ffffffff80265e22>] add_to_page_cache_lru+0xe/0x23
       [<ffffffff80265d31>] add_to_page_cache+0x1de/0x2c1
       [<ffffffff80265e22>] add_to_page_cache_lru+0xe/0x23
       [<ffffffff80266985>] find_or_create_page+0x4c/0x73
       [<ffffffff802ae716>] __getblk+0x118/0x23c
       [<ffffffff802afa91>] __bread+0x6/0x9c
       [<ffffffff802f382d>] read_block_bitmap+0x34/0x65
       [<ffffffff802f3e1b>] ext3_free_blocks_sb+0xec/0x3d4
       [<ffffffff802f4131>] ext3_free_blocks+0x2e/0x61
       [<ffffffff802f82bc>] ext3_free_data+0xaa/0xda
       [<ffffffff802f8976>] ext3_truncate+0x4d2/0x84e
       [<ffffffff8026df5a>] pagevec_lookup+0x17/0x1e
       [<ffffffff8026e7b1>] truncate_inode_pages_range+0x1f4/0x323
       [<ffffffff802614b4>] add_preempt_count+0x14/0xe4
       [<ffffffff80304d13>] journal_stop+0x1fe/0x21d
       [<ffffffff8027661a>] vmtruncate+0xa2/0xc0
       [<ffffffff802a292b>] inode_setattr+0x22/0x10a
       [<ffffffff802f9b51>] ext3_setattr+0x136/0x18f
       [<ffffffff802a2b1d>] notify_change+0x10a/0x241
       [<ffffffff802a2b3b>] notify_change+0x128/0x241
       [<ffffffff8028e35e>] do_truncate+0x56/0x7f
       [<ffffffff8028e369>] do_truncate+0x61/0x7f
       [<ffffffff80296278>] get_write_access+0x3f/0x45
       [<ffffffff802973c7>] may_open+0x193/0x1af
       [<ffffffff80299869>] open_namei+0x2cb/0x63e
       [<ffffffff8025718b>] rt_up_read+0x53/0x5c
       [<ffffffff8056da59>] do_page_fault+0x479/0x7cc
       [<ffffffff8028dce1>] do_filp_open+0x1c/0x38
       [<ffffffff8056a4f9>] rt_spin_unlock+0x17/0x47
       [<ffffffff8028da05>] get_unused_fd+0xf9/0x107
       [<ffffffff8028dd45>] do_sys_open+0x48/0xd5
       [<ffffffff8020950e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
       [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff

I guess we're doing lock_page() against a blockdev pagecache page here
while holding truncate_mutex against some S_ISREG file.

-> #0 (&ei->truncate_mutex){--..}:
       [<ffffffff802503b9>] print_circular_bug_header+0xcc/0xd3
       [<ffffffff80251a22>] __lock_acquire+0x96e/0xc35
       [<ffffffff802520c9>] lock_acquire+0x48/0x61
       [<ffffffff802f75e5>] ext3_get_blocks_handle+0x1a4/0x8f7
       [<ffffffff8056a6d4>] _mutex_lock+0x26/0x52
       [<ffffffff802f75e5>] ext3_get_blocks_handle+0x1a4/0x8f7
       [<ffffffff802504b2>] find_usage_backwards+0xb0/0xd9
       [<ffffffff802504b2>] find_usage_backwards+0xb0/0xd9
       [<ffffffff80250d7c>] debug_check_no_locks_freed+0x11d/0x129
       [<ffffffff80250c33>] trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x115/0x138
       [<ffffffff8024efdc>] lockdep_init_map+0xac/0x41f
       [<ffffffff802614b4>] add_preempt_count+0x14/0xe4
       [<ffffffff802f8035>] ext3_get_block+0xc2/0xe4
       [<ffffffff802aeed3>] __block_prepare_write+0x195/0x442
       [<ffffffff802f7f73>] ext3_get_block+0x0/0xe4
       [<ffffffff802af19a>] block_prepare_write+0x1a/0x25
       [<ffffffff802f93e9>] ext3_prepare_write+0xb2/0x17b
       [<ffffffff802671b1>] generic_file_buffered_write+0x298/0x646
       [<ffffffff8023944e>] current_fs_time+0x3b/0x40
       [<ffffffff802614b4>] add_preempt_count+0x14/0xe4
       [<ffffffff802678ae>] __generic_file_aio_write_nolock+0x34f/0x3b9
       [<ffffffff8024ed3d>] put_lock_stats+0xe/0x2a
       [<ffffffff80267964>] generic_file_aio_write+0x4c/0xc4
       [<ffffffff80267979>] generic_file_aio_write+0x61/0xc4
       [<ffffffff802fcf18>] ext3_orphan_del+0x53/0x19f
       [<ffffffff802f5768>] ext3_file_write+0x1c/0x9d
       [<ffffffff8028ef31>] do_sync_write+0xcc/0x10f
       [<ffffffff80246f9c>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2e
       [<ffffffff8024ecfe>] get_lock_stats+0xe/0x3f
       [<ffffffff8024ed9a>] lock_release_holdtime+0x41/0x4f
       [<ffffffff8024ed3d>] put_lock_stats+0xe/0x2a
       [<ffffffff8028dfb1>] sys_fchmod+0xa3/0xbd
       [<ffffffff8056a717>] _mutex_unlock+0x17/0x20
       [<ffffffff8028f6cd>] vfs_write+0xb6/0x148
       [<ffffffff8028fc61>] sys_write+0x48/0x74
       [<ffffffff8020950e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
       [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff

Here we're taking a file's truncate_mutex while holding lock_page() against
one of its pages.  This is the correct lock ranking, I suppose.

This is one of those fairly common cross-inode notabugs, I suspect.