Jiri Slaby wrote at lkml:
> [email protected] napsal(a):
>> It's living longer before it throws a complaint - we're making it out of
>> rc.sysinit and into rc5.d ;) This time we were in an 'id' command from this:
>>
>> test `id -u` = 0 || exit 4
>>
>> in either S11mcstrans or S18auditd. Looks like the Firewire (which I
>> don't actually use for anything) threw an IRQ at an inopportune time?
>>
>> (Obviously I stress different code paths than Arjan or Ingo. But if
>> I did the same things they did, it wouldn't be interesting.. ;)
>>
>> [ 464.687000] ( id-2700 |#0): new 569737200 us user-latency.
>> [ 464.687000] stopped custom tracer.
>> [ 464.687000]
>> [ 464.687000] ============================
>> [ 464.687000] [ BUG: illegal lock usage! ]
>> [ 464.687000] ----------------------------
>> [ 464.687000] illegal {in-hardirq-W} -> {hardirq-on-W} usage.
>> [ 464.687000] id/2700 [HC0[0]:SC0[1]:HE1:SE0] takes:
>> [ 464.687000] (&list->lock){++..}, at: [<c0351a07>] unix_stream_connect+0x334/0x408
>> [ 464.687000] {in-hardirq-W} state was registered at:
>> [ 464.687000] [<c012dd45>] lockdep_acquire+0x67/0x7f
>> [ 464.687000] [<c0383f11>] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x30/0x3f
>> [ 464.687000] [<c02fa93f>] skb_dequeue+0x18/0x49
>> [ 464.687000] [<f086b7f1>] hpsb_bus_reset+0x5e/0xa2 [ieee1394]
>> [ 464.687000] [<f0887007>] ohci_irq_handler+0x370/0x726 [ohci1394]
>> [ 464.687000] [<c013f9a8>] handle_IRQ_event+0x1d/0x52
>> [ 464.687000] [<c0140bc4>] handle_level_irq+0x97/0xe3
>> [ 464.687000] [<c01045d0>] do_IRQ+0x8b/0xaf
>> [ 464.687000] irq event stamp: 2964
>> [ 464.687000] hardirqs last enabled at (2963): [<c0384223>] _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x3b/0x6d
>> [ 464.687000] hardirqs last disabled at (2962): [<c0383ef5>] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x14/0x3f
>> [ 464.687000] softirqs last enabled at (2956): [<c0119da0>] __do_softirq+0x9d/0xa5
>> [ 464.687000] softirqs last disabled at (2964): [<c0383f6b>] _spin_lock_bh+0x10/0x3a
>> [ 464.687000]
>> [ 464.687000] other info that might help us debug this:
>> [ 464.687000] 1 locks held by id/2700:
>> [ 464.687000] #0: (&u->lock){--..}, at: [<c03517bb>] unix_stream_connect+0xe8/0x408
>> [ 464.687000]
>> [ 464.687000] stack backtrace:
>> [ 464.687000] [<c01032d6>] show_trace_log_lvl+0x64/0x125
>> [ 464.687000] [<c0103865>] show_trace+0x1b/0x20
>> [ 464.687000] [<c010391c>] dump_stack+0x1f/0x24
>> [ 464.687000] [<c012bfb1>] print_usage_bug+0x1a8/0x1b4
>> [ 464.687000] [<c012c6c7>] mark_lock+0x2ba/0x4e5
>> [ 464.687000] [<c012d2b8>] __lockdep_acquire+0x476/0xa91
>> [ 464.687000] [<c012dd45>] lockdep_acquire+0x67/0x7f
>> [ 464.687000] [<c0383f87>] _spin_lock_bh+0x2c/0x3a
>> [ 464.687000] [<c0351a07>] unix_stream_connect+0x334/0x408
>> [ 464.687000] [<c02f7236>] sys_connect+0x6e/0xa3
>> [ 464.687000] [<c02f79da>] sys_socketcall+0x96/0x190
>> [ 464.687000] [<c03845e2>] sysenter_past_esp+0x63/0xa1
>>
> That one would be corrected now:
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/6/5/100
Do you think so? Looks different to me: skb_dequeue is obviously called
from ieee1394's packet handling. The patch from 2006/6/5 addresses
ieee1394's management of protocol driver callbacks.
(added Cc: linux1394-devel)
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-==- -==- ---=-
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
