Thread (8 messages) 8 messages, 3 authors, 2009-02-11

Re: next-20090211: BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_SUBCLASSES too low!

From: Alexander Beregalov <hidden>
Date: 2009-02-11 12:52:37
Also in: lkml

2009/2/11 Peter Zijlstra [off-list ref]:
On Wed, 2009-02-11 at 13:24 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
quoted
On Wed, 2009-02-11 at 13:23 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
quoted
On Wed, 2009-02-11 at 15:14 +0300, Alexander Beregalov wrote:
quoted
Hi

Full dmesg is attached.

Lock dependency validator: Copyright (c) 2006 Red Hat, Inc., Ingo Molnar
.... MAX_LOCKDEP_SUBCLASSES:  8
.... MAX_LOCK_DEPTH:          48
.... MAX_LOCKDEP_KEYS:        8191
.... CLASSHASH_SIZE:          4096
.... MAX_LOCKDEP_ENTRIES:     8192
.... MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS:      16384
.... CHAINHASH_SIZE:          8192
 memory used by lock dependency info: 4351 kB
 per task-struct memory footprint: 2688 bytes
<..>
BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_SUBCLASSES too low!
turning off the locking correctness validator.
Is this an allyesconfig or something other massive bloated?
Sorry, not playing attention, its SUB classes.. let me look at that,
that smells like a rotten annotation.
Could you run with the below patch, so that we can see where this
happens?
BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_SUBCLASSES too low!
turning off the locking correctness validator.
Pid: 2105, comm: btrfs-endio-wri Not tainted 2.6.29-rc4-next-20090211-dirty #2
Call Trace:
 [<ffffffff8026cbf9>] __lock_acquire+0x6b9/0x12c0
 [<ffffffff8026d891>] lock_acquire+0x91/0xc0
 [<ffffffff80447324>] ? btrfs_tree_lock+0xc4/0x160
 [<ffffffff8062eb36>] _spin_lock_nested+0x46/0x80
 [<ffffffff80447324>] ? btrfs_tree_lock+0xc4/0x160
 [<ffffffff80447324>] btrfs_tree_lock+0xc4/0x160
 [<ffffffff804471a0>] ? btrfs_wake_function+0x0/0x10
 [<ffffffff8040bce6>] btrfs_init_new_buffer+0xa6/0x150
 [<ffffffff80412fa1>] btrfs_alloc_free_block+0x81/0x90
 [<ffffffff80402a16>] __btrfs_cow_block+0x7a6/0xb70
 [<ffffffff804034e2>] btrfs_cow_block+0x112/0x2d0
 [<ffffffff804072f3>] btrfs_search_slot+0x223/0xb00
 [<ffffffff80235a99>] ? sub_preempt_count+0xa9/0xf0
 [<ffffffff804178d1>] btrfs_lookup_csum+0x61/0x150
 [<ffffffff8026c2ed>] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xd/0x10
 [<ffffffff80418356>] btrfs_csum_file_blocks+0xc6/0x7d0
 [<ffffffff802c2315>] ? kmem_cache_free+0xb5/0x110
 [<ffffffff802c2315>] ? kmem_cache_free+0xb5/0x110
 [<ffffffff8026c2ed>] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xd/0x10
 [<ffffffff80437c76>] ? free_extent_state+0x46/0x70
 [<ffffffff80439462>] ? clear_extent_bit+0xe2/0x2e0
 [<ffffffff8042166a>] add_pending_csums+0x4a/0x70
 [<ffffffff80422ac5>] btrfs_finish_ordered_io+0x115/0x1e0
 [<ffffffff80422ba0>] btrfs_writepage_end_io_hook+0x10/0x20
 [<ffffffff8043abf4>] end_bio_extent_writepage+0x104/0x1e0
 [<ffffffff8026c282>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x182/0x1e0
 [<ffffffff802ef0cc>] bio_endio+0x1c/0x40
 [<ffffffff8041b02b>] end_workqueue_fn+0xeb/0x120
 [<ffffffff804446ea>] worker_loop+0x7a/0x1b0
 [<ffffffff80444670>] ? worker_loop+0x0/0x1b0
 [<ffffffff80259126>] kthread+0x56/0x90
 [<ffffffff8020cc5a>] child_rip+0xa/0x20
 [<ffffffff80235969>] ? finish_task_switch+0x89/0x110
 [<ffffffff8062f546>] ? _spin_unlock_irq+0x36/0x60
 [<ffffffff8020c640>] ? restore_args+0x0/0x30
 [<ffffffff802590d0>] ? kthread+0x0/0x90
 [<ffffffff8020cc50>] ? child_rip+0x0/0x20
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help