Re: lockdep trace from nfsd

[Jeff Layton]

On Thu, 28 Feb 2013 19:30:38 -0500
Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> [   39.878535] =====================================
> [   39.879670] [ BUG: rpc.nfsd/666 still has locks held! ]
> [   39.880871] 3.8.0+ #3 Not tainted
> [   39.881858] -------------------------------------
> [   39.882850] 2 locks on stack by rpc.nfsd/666:
> [   39.883868]  #0: held:     (nfsd_mutex){+.+.+.}, instance: ffffffffa01cf0b8, at: [<ffffffffa0193d57>] write_ports+0x37/0x7a0 [nfsd]
> [   39.884750]  #1: held:     (rpcb_create_local_mutex){+.+.+.}, instance: ffffffffa016d878, at: [<ffffffffa0153916>] rpcb_create_local+0x46/0x90 [sunrpc]
> [   39.885903] 
> stack backtrace:
> [   39.897044] Pid: 666, comm: rpc.nfsd Not tainted 3.8.0+ #3
> [   39.898186] Call Trace:
> [   39.900755]  [<ffffffff810b9c6a>] debug_check_no_locks_held+0x9a/0xa0
> [   39.901823]  [<ffffffffa0145965>] rpc_wait_bit_killable+0x85/0xb0 [sunrpc]
> [   39.902866]  [<ffffffff8161bf10>] __wait_on_bit+0x60/0x90
> [   39.903879]  [<ffffffffa0147860>] ? __rpc_execute+0x170/0x5a0 [sunrpc]
> [   39.904900]  [<ffffffffa01458e0>] ? __rpc_wait_for_completion_task+0x30/0x30 [sunrpc]
> [   39.905969]  [<ffffffff8161bfbc>] out_of_line_wait_on_bit+0x7c/0x90
> [   39.907010]  [<ffffffffa0147860>] ? __rpc_execute+0x170/0x5a0 [sunrpc]
> [   39.908070]  [<ffffffff81075f00>] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x50/0x50
> [   39.909124]  [<ffffffffa0139b50>] ? call_connect+0xa0/0xa0 [sunrpc]
> [   39.910154]  [<ffffffffa0147891>] __rpc_execute+0x1a1/0x5a0 [sunrpc]
> [   39.911176]  [<ffffffff81075e9e>] ? wake_up_bit+0x2e/0x40
> [   39.912058]  [<ffffffffa0147d49>] rpc_execute+0x59/0x180 [sunrpc]
> [   39.912745]  [<ffffffffa013da00>] rpc_run_task+0x70/0x90 [sunrpc]
> [   39.913446]  [<ffffffffa013db23>] rpc_call_sync+0x43/0xa0 [sunrpc]
> [   39.914280]  [<ffffffffa013dbd2>] rpc_ping+0x52/0x70 [sunrpc]
> [   39.914992]  [<ffffffffa013de08>] rpc_create+0x188/0x230 [sunrpc]
> [   39.915735]  [<ffffffff8100a4a9>] ? sched_clock+0x9/0x10
> [   39.916577]  [<ffffffff810b807e>] ? put_lock_stats.isra.25+0xe/0x40
> [   39.917635]  [<ffffffff810b871c>] ? lock_release_holdtime.part.26+0xcc/0x140
> [   39.918667]  [<ffffffffa015331c>] rpcb_create_local_unix+0x5c/0xe0 [sunrpc]
> [   39.919669]  [<ffffffffa0153948>] rpcb_create_local+0x78/0x90 [sunrpc]
> [   39.920705]  [<ffffffffa014a653>] svc_rpcb_setup+0x23/0x50 [sunrpc]
> [   39.921725]  [<ffffffffa014a6b4>] svc_bind+0x34/0x50 [sunrpc]
> [   39.921733]  [<ffffffffa01909ed>] nfsd_create_serv+0x1cd/0x320 [nfsd]
> [   39.921738]  [<ffffffffa0190825>] ? nfsd_create_serv+0x5/0x320 [nfsd]
> [   39.921742]  [<ffffffffa019424a>] write_ports+0x52a/0x7a0 [nfsd]
> [   39.921746]  [<ffffffffa0194138>] ? write_ports+0x418/0x7a0 [nfsd]
> [   39.921750]  [<ffffffff816203c5>] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x35/0x60
> [   39.921754]  [<ffffffff811de09a>] ? simple_transaction_get+0xca/0xe0
> [   39.921759]  [<ffffffffa0193d20>] ? write_maxblksize+0x2e0/0x2e0 [nfsd]
> [   39.921764]  [<ffffffffa0192367>] nfsctl_transaction_write+0x57/0x90 [nfsd]
> [   39.921768]  [<ffffffff811b45ff>] vfs_write+0xaf/0x190
> [   39.921771]  [<ffffffff811b4955>] sys_write+0x55/0xa0
> [   39.921775]  [<ffffffff81628b99>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


Ok, I see...

rpc_wait_bit_killable() calls freezable_schedule(). That calls
freezer_count() which calls  try_to_freeze(). try_to_freeze does this
lockdep check now as of commit 6aa9707099.

The assumption seems to be that freezing a thread while holding any
sort of lock is bad. The rationale in that patch seems a bit sketchy to
me though. We can be fairly certain that we're not going to deadlock by
holding these locks, but I guess there could be something I've missed.

Mandeep, can you elaborate on whether there's really a deadlock
scenario here? If not, then is there some way to annotate these locks
so this lockdep pop goes away?

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/