On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 08:58:57 +1000
Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 02:20:04PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > While testing some knfsd patches on XFS today, I got this lockdep
> > splatter. The kernel is a stock -rc2 kernel with a pile of knfsd
> > patches on top. There are a couple of others in other areas, but
> > nothing that would affect this.
> >
> > Nothing crashed or seems to be hung, so I'm not sure if it's a real
> > problem or not...
>
> Known false positive. the problem is that lockdep is too stupid to
> realise you can't mmap a directory inode, but it sees unused
> directory inodes from memory reclaim in page faults (i.e. under the
> mmap_sem) and so therefore thinks that taking a page fault in
> readdir() while holding a directory inode lock on a referenced
> directory inode will deadlock....
>
> Teaching lockdep the intricacies of locking heirarchies is difficult
> and painful. Fixing this one (and all the other stupidities lockdep
> reports because of this) can't be done through annotations - it
> requires rewriting a bunch of directory code to use different locks.
> And, well, it ain't actually broken right now and there's other more
> important issues to be fixed, so unless someone else beats me to
> rewriting the readdir readahead code, lockdep is going to remain
> unhappy about XFS.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
No problem. Just figured I'd report it in case it were something new.
I'll just keep ignoring it.
Thanks!
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
|