Re: [BUG 3.3-rc2] spinlock trylock failure on UP on CPU#0

[Shaohua Li]

2012/2/6 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Ok, interesting. You're triggering the issue because you have a UP
> build with the spinlock debugging code enabled.
>
> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Knut Petersen
> <Knut_Petersen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Booting  23783f817bceedd6d4e549385e3f400ea64059e5 I get the following trace
>> an AOpen i915GMm-hfs with Pentium-M Dothan:
>
> This is probably the same "technically legal" code that LOCKDEP also
> is unhappy about - the nested fast path release. We do a trylock on
> the queue lock while we already are holding the queue lock
> recursively.
>
> Jens, Tejun - the crazy-ass games that this code is playing is clearly
> messing not just with lockdep, it's messing with some very reasonable
> spinlock sanity checks on UP (which just boil down to "a spinlock
> should never have contention on UP")
>
> Any chance of sanitizing this all?
I just sent out a debug patch, please try:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=132849146702770&w=2
--
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/