Re: BUG: lockdep (inconsistent usage) in netlink
From: Benjamin Block <hidden>
Date: 2014-08-21 20:44:12
Also in:
linux-acpi, lkml
On 08/21/2014 08:52 PM, Benjamin Block wrote:
Hello, while rebooting one of my dev-machines I stumbled over this lockdep-mess-up:quoted
================================= [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ] 3.17.0-rc1-00001-gb83ca8c #2 Tainted: G O --------------------------------- inconsistent {HARDIRQ-ON-W} -> {IN-HARDIRQ-W} usage. swapper/0/0 [HC1[1]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] takes: (&(&list->lock)->rlock#3){?.-...}, at: [<ffffffff819580db>] skb_queue_tail+0x2b/0x60 {HARDIRQ-ON-W} state was registered at: [<ffffffff8111c9f7>] __lock_acquire+0x877/0x1c90 [<ffffffff8111e45a>] lock_acquire+0xca/0x120 [<ffffffff81afc744>] _raw_spin_lock_bh+0x44/0x80 [<ffffffff819a8918>] netlink_poll+0xf8/0x1c0 [<ffffffff8194e031>] sock_poll+0x161/0x190 [<ffffffff81271ffb>] SyS_epoll_ctl+0x51b/0xd10 [<ffffffff81afd452>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b irq event stamp: 1699744 hardirqs last enabled at (1699741): [<ffffffff8189b1d4>] cpuidle_enter_state+0xc4/0x190 hardirqs last disabled at (1699742): [<ffffffff81afdfaa>] common_interrupt+0x6a/0x6f softirqs last enabled at (1699744): [<ffffffff810d7fda>] _local_bh_enable+0x4a/0x50 softirqs last disabled at (1699743): [<ffffffff810d88f0>] irq_enter+0x30/0x70 other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 ---- lock(&(&list->lock)->rlock#3); <Interrupt> lock(&(&list->lock)->rlock#3); *** DEADLOCK *** no locks held by swapper/0/0. stack backtrace: CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Tainted: G O 3.17.0-rc1-00001-gb83ca8c #2 Hardware name: ASUS All Series/Q87T, BIOS 0216 10/16/2013 ffffffff8295a5b0 ffff8802158039a8 ffffffff81af20fa 0000000000000000 ffffffff822164e0 ffff880215803a08 ffffffff81aee400 0000000000000000 ffffffff00000000 ffff880200000001 ffffffff8105ac0f ffffffff82d2abe0 Call Trace: <IRQ> [<ffffffff81af20fa>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x68 [<ffffffff81aee400>] print_usage_bug+0x1ec/0x1fd [<ffffffff8105ac0f>] ? save_stack_trace+0x2f/0x50 [<ffffffff8111b600>] ? print_irq_inversion_bug+0x200/0x200 [<ffffffff8111c061>] mark_lock+0x191/0x2b0 [<ffffffff8111c96a>] __lock_acquire+0x7ea/0x1c90 [<ffffffff8111ca94>] ? __lock_acquire+0x914/0x1c90 [<ffffffff8111b600>] ? print_irq_inversion_bug+0x200/0x200 [<ffffffff8111ca94>] ? __lock_acquire+0x914/0x1c90 [<ffffffff8111e45a>] lock_acquire+0xca/0x120 [<ffffffff819580db>] ? skb_queue_tail+0x2b/0x60 [<ffffffff81afc590>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x50/0x90 [<ffffffff819580db>] ? skb_queue_tail+0x2b/0x60 [<ffffffff819580db>] skb_queue_tail+0x2b/0x60 [<ffffffff819a774f>] __netlink_sendskb+0x21f/0x250 [<ffffffff819a7d63>] netlink_broadcast_filtered+0x273/0x3b0 [<ffffffff819a7ebd>] netlink_broadcast+0x1d/0x20 [<ffffffff8152fb8a>] ? nla_reserve+0x2a/0x40 [<ffffffff81589728>] acpi_bus_generate_netlink_event+0x160/0x178 [<ffffffff815a8db9>] acpi_button_notify+0xe1/0xec [<ffffffff81580648>] acpi_device_notify+0x19/0x1b [<ffffffff81580662>] acpi_device_notify_fixed+0x18/0x1c [<ffffffff8158f039>] acpi_ev_fixed_event_detect+0xe6/0x10d [<ffffffff8159157a>] acpi_ev_sci_xrupt_handler+0x19/0x3f [<ffffffff8157c1a9>] acpi_irq+0x16/0x31 [<ffffffff81131e2a>] handle_irq_event_percpu+0x6a/0x1d0 [<ffffffff81131fd8>] handle_irq_event+0x48/0x70 [<ffffffff8113534f>] ? handle_fasteoi_irq+0x2f/0x160 [<ffffffff811353e7>] handle_fasteoi_irq+0xc7/0x160 [<ffffffff8104cd94>] handle_irq+0x134/0x150 [<ffffffff810f4876>] ? atomic_notifier_call_chain+0x16/0x20 [<ffffffff81054dec>] ? __exit_idle+0x2c/0x30 [<ffffffff81affe7e>] do_IRQ+0x5e/0x100 [<ffffffff81afdfaf>] common_interrupt+0x6f/0x6f <EOI> [<ffffffff8189b1df>] ? cpuidle_enter_state+0xcf/0x190 [<ffffffff8189b1d4>] ? cpuidle_enter_state+0xc4/0x190 [<ffffffff8189b387>] cpuidle_enter+0x17/0x20 [<ffffffff81111ae1>] cpu_startup_entry+0x3a1/0x3c0 [<ffffffff81ae92a4>] rest_init+0xc4/0xd0 [<ffffffff81ae91e5>] ? rest_init+0x5/0xd0 [<ffffffff825718a1>] ? ftrace_init+0xa8/0x13b [<ffffffff8255103a>] start_kernel+0x461/0x46e [<ffffffff82550939>] ? set_init_arg+0x57/0x57 [<ffffffff825505af>] x86_64_start_reservations+0x2a/0x2c [<ffffffff825506ae>] x86_64_start_kernel+0xfd/0x101Sadly I couldn't reproduce it. This looks all to be very general functions and my best guess is, netlink_poll() needs to be irq-save. Thing is, the corresponding code is quite old and I can't really bisec it, because the none-reproducibility.
Thinking more about it.. this seems to be unlikely. More like the acpi-irq chain should not do netlink-events still in irq-context - just guessing here, sry :). I tracked around a little and came up with more recent commits in that call-chain: commit 0bf6368ee8f25826d0645c0f7a4f17c8845356a4 - adds acpi_bus_generate_netlink_event to the chain Again, all other places around the chain seems quit old or unrelated.
There is only the small ipv6-fib patch applied, I send in earlier today (https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/21/506). This should have nothing to do with this here.
- Benjamin
Attachments
- signature.asc [application/pgp-signature] 648 bytes