1. 05 1月, 2010 5 次提交
  2. 03 1月, 2010 5 次提交
  3. 02 1月, 2010 10 次提交
    • R
      nilfs2: update mailing list address · 6aff43f8
      Ryusuke Konishi 提交于
      This replaces the list address for nilfs discussion to linux-nilfs at
      vger.kernel.org from users at nilfs.org.
      Signed-off-by: NRyusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@lab.ntt.co.jp>
      6aff43f8
    • F
      reiserfs: Safely acquire i_mutex from xattr_rmdir · 835d5247
      Frederic Weisbecker 提交于
      Relax the reiserfs lock before taking the inode mutex from
      xattr_rmdir() to avoid the usual reiserfs lock <-> inode mutex
      bad dependency.
      Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
      Tested-by: NChristian Kujau <lists@nerdbynature.de>
      Cc: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
      Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
      Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      835d5247
    • F
      reiserfs: Safely acquire i_mutex from reiserfs_for_each_xattr · 8b513f56
      Frederic Weisbecker 提交于
      Relax the reiserfs lock before taking the inode mutex from
      reiserfs_for_each_xattr() to avoid the usual bad dependencies:
      
      =======================================================
      [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
      2.6.32-atom #179
      -------------------------------------------------------
      rm/3242 is trying to acquire lock:
       (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4/3){+.+.+.}, at: [<c11428ef>] reiserfs_for_each_xattr+0x23f/0x290
      
      but task is already holding lock:
       (&REISERFS_SB(s)->lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<c1143389>] reiserfs_write_lock+0x29/0x40
      
      which lock already depends on the new lock.
      
      the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
      
      -> #1 (&REISERFS_SB(s)->lock){+.+.+.}:
             [<c105ea7f>] __lock_acquire+0x11ff/0x19e0
             [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
             [<c1401aab>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
             [<c1143339>] reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
             [<c1117022>] reiserfs_lookup+0x62/0x140
             [<c10bd85f>] __lookup_hash+0xef/0x110
             [<c10bf21d>] lookup_one_len+0x8d/0xc0
             [<c1141e3a>] open_xa_dir+0xea/0x1b0
             [<c1142720>] reiserfs_for_each_xattr+0x70/0x290
             [<c11429ba>] reiserfs_delete_xattrs+0x1a/0x60
             [<c111ea2f>] reiserfs_delete_inode+0x9f/0x150
             [<c10c9c32>] generic_delete_inode+0xa2/0x170
             [<c10c9d4f>] generic_drop_inode+0x4f/0x70
             [<c10c8b07>] iput+0x47/0x50
             [<c10c0965>] do_unlinkat+0xd5/0x160
             [<c10c0b13>] sys_unlinkat+0x23/0x40
             [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      
      -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4/3){+.+.+.}:
             [<c105f176>] __lock_acquire+0x18f6/0x19e0
             [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
             [<c1401aab>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
             [<c11428ef>] reiserfs_for_each_xattr+0x23f/0x290
             [<c11429ba>] reiserfs_delete_xattrs+0x1a/0x60
             [<c111ea2f>] reiserfs_delete_inode+0x9f/0x150
             [<c10c9c32>] generic_delete_inode+0xa2/0x170
             [<c10c9d4f>] generic_drop_inode+0x4f/0x70
             [<c10c8b07>] iput+0x47/0x50
             [<c10c0965>] do_unlinkat+0xd5/0x160
             [<c10c0b13>] sys_unlinkat+0x23/0x40
             [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      
      other info that might help us debug this:
      
      1 lock held by rm/3242:
       #0:  (&REISERFS_SB(s)->lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<c1143389>] reiserfs_write_lock+0x29/0x40
      
      stack backtrace:
      Pid: 3242, comm: rm Not tainted 2.6.32-atom #179
      Call Trace:
       [<c13ffa13>] ? printk+0x18/0x1a
       [<c105d33a>] print_circular_bug+0xca/0xd0
       [<c105f176>] __lock_acquire+0x18f6/0x19e0
       [<c105c932>] ? mark_held_locks+0x62/0x80
       [<c105cc3b>] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xb/0x10
       [<c1401098>] ? mutex_unlock+0x8/0x10
       [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
       [<c11428ef>] ? reiserfs_for_each_xattr+0x23f/0x290
       [<c11428ef>] ? reiserfs_for_each_xattr+0x23f/0x290
       [<c1401aab>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
       [<c11428ef>] ? reiserfs_for_each_xattr+0x23f/0x290
       [<c11428ef>] reiserfs_for_each_xattr+0x23f/0x290
       [<c1143180>] ? delete_one_xattr+0x0/0x100
       [<c11429ba>] reiserfs_delete_xattrs+0x1a/0x60
       [<c1143339>] ? reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
       [<c111ea2f>] reiserfs_delete_inode+0x9f/0x150
       [<c11b0d4f>] ? _atomic_dec_and_lock+0x4f/0x70
       [<c111e990>] ? reiserfs_delete_inode+0x0/0x150
       [<c10c9c32>] generic_delete_inode+0xa2/0x170
       [<c10c9d4f>] generic_drop_inode+0x4f/0x70
       [<c10c8b07>] iput+0x47/0x50
       [<c10c0965>] do_unlinkat+0xd5/0x160
       [<c1401098>] ? mutex_unlock+0x8/0x10
       [<c10c3e0d>] ? vfs_readdir+0x7d/0xb0
       [<c10c3af0>] ? filldir64+0x0/0xf0
       [<c1002ef3>] ? sysenter_exit+0xf/0x16
       [<c105cbe4>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x124/0x170
       [<c10c0b13>] sys_unlinkat+0x23/0x40
       [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
      Tested-by: NChristian Kujau <lists@nerdbynature.de>
      Cc: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
      Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
      Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      8b513f56
    • F
      reiserfs: Fix journal mutex <-> inode mutex lock inversion · 4dd85969
      Frederic Weisbecker 提交于
      We need to relax the reiserfs lock before locking the inode mutex
      from xattr_unlink(), otherwise we'll face the usual bad dependencies:
      
      =======================================================
      [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
      2.6.32-atom #178
      -------------------------------------------------------
      rm/3202 is trying to acquire lock:
       (&journal->j_mutex){+.+...}, at: [<c113c234>] do_journal_begin_r+0x94/0x360
      
      but task is already holding lock:
       (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4/2){+.+...}, at: [<c1142a67>] xattr_unlink+0x57/0xb0
      
      which lock already depends on the new lock.
      
      the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
      
      -> #2 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4/2){+.+...}:
             [<c105ea7f>] __lock_acquire+0x11ff/0x19e0
             [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
             [<c1401a7b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
             [<c1142a67>] xattr_unlink+0x57/0xb0
             [<c1143179>] delete_one_xattr+0x29/0x100
             [<c11427bb>] reiserfs_for_each_xattr+0x10b/0x290
             [<c11429ba>] reiserfs_delete_xattrs+0x1a/0x60
             [<c111ea2f>] reiserfs_delete_inode+0x9f/0x150
             [<c10c9c32>] generic_delete_inode+0xa2/0x170
             [<c10c9d4f>] generic_drop_inode+0x4f/0x70
             [<c10c8b07>] iput+0x47/0x50
             [<c10c0965>] do_unlinkat+0xd5/0x160
             [<c10c0b13>] sys_unlinkat+0x23/0x40
             [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      
      -> #1 (&REISERFS_SB(s)->lock){+.+.+.}:
             [<c105ea7f>] __lock_acquire+0x11ff/0x19e0
             [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
             [<c1401a7b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
             [<c1143359>] reiserfs_write_lock+0x29/0x40
             [<c113c23c>] do_journal_begin_r+0x9c/0x360
             [<c113c680>] journal_begin+0x80/0x130
             [<c1127363>] reiserfs_remount+0x223/0x4e0
             [<c10b6dd6>] do_remount_sb+0xa6/0x140
             [<c10ce6a0>] do_mount+0x560/0x750
             [<c10ce914>] sys_mount+0x84/0xb0
             [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      
      -> #0 (&journal->j_mutex){+.+...}:
             [<c105f176>] __lock_acquire+0x18f6/0x19e0
             [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
             [<c1401a7b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
             [<c113c234>] do_journal_begin_r+0x94/0x360
             [<c113c680>] journal_begin+0x80/0x130
             [<c1116d63>] reiserfs_unlink+0x83/0x2e0
             [<c1142a74>] xattr_unlink+0x64/0xb0
             [<c1143179>] delete_one_xattr+0x29/0x100
             [<c11427bb>] reiserfs_for_each_xattr+0x10b/0x290
             [<c11429ba>] reiserfs_delete_xattrs+0x1a/0x60
             [<c111ea2f>] reiserfs_delete_inode+0x9f/0x150
             [<c10c9c32>] generic_delete_inode+0xa2/0x170
             [<c10c9d4f>] generic_drop_inode+0x4f/0x70
             [<c10c8b07>] iput+0x47/0x50
             [<c10c0965>] do_unlinkat+0xd5/0x160
             [<c10c0b13>] sys_unlinkat+0x23/0x40
             [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      
      other info that might help us debug this:
      
      2 locks held by rm/3202:
       #0:  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4/3){+.+.+.}, at: [<c114274b>] reiserfs_for_each_xattr+0x9b/0x290
       #1:  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4/2){+.+...}, at: [<c1142a67>] xattr_unlink+0x57/0xb0
      
      stack backtrace:
      Pid: 3202, comm: rm Not tainted 2.6.32-atom #178
      Call Trace:
       [<c13ff9e3>] ? printk+0x18/0x1a
       [<c105d33a>] print_circular_bug+0xca/0xd0
       [<c105f176>] __lock_acquire+0x18f6/0x19e0
       [<c1142a67>] ? xattr_unlink+0x57/0xb0
       [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
       [<c113c234>] ? do_journal_begin_r+0x94/0x360
       [<c113c234>] ? do_journal_begin_r+0x94/0x360
       [<c1401a7b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
       [<c113c234>] ? do_journal_begin_r+0x94/0x360
       [<c113c234>] do_journal_begin_r+0x94/0x360
       [<c10411b6>] ? run_timer_softirq+0x1a6/0x220
       [<c103cb00>] ? __do_softirq+0x50/0x140
       [<c113c680>] journal_begin+0x80/0x130
       [<c103cba2>] ? __do_softirq+0xf2/0x140
       [<c104f72f>] ? hrtimer_interrupt+0xdf/0x220
       [<c1116d63>] reiserfs_unlink+0x83/0x2e0
       [<c105c932>] ? mark_held_locks+0x62/0x80
       [<c11b8d08>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_thunk+0xc/0x10
       [<c1002fd8>] ? restore_all_notrace+0x0/0x18
       [<c1142a67>] ? xattr_unlink+0x57/0xb0
       [<c1142a74>] xattr_unlink+0x64/0xb0
       [<c1143179>] delete_one_xattr+0x29/0x100
       [<c11427bb>] reiserfs_for_each_xattr+0x10b/0x290
       [<c1143150>] ? delete_one_xattr+0x0/0x100
       [<c1401cb9>] ? mutex_lock_nested+0x299/0x340
       [<c11429ba>] reiserfs_delete_xattrs+0x1a/0x60
       [<c1143309>] ? reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
       [<c111ea2f>] reiserfs_delete_inode+0x9f/0x150
       [<c11b0d1f>] ? _atomic_dec_and_lock+0x4f/0x70
       [<c111e990>] ? reiserfs_delete_inode+0x0/0x150
       [<c10c9c32>] generic_delete_inode+0xa2/0x170
       [<c10c9d4f>] generic_drop_inode+0x4f/0x70
       [<c10c8b07>] iput+0x47/0x50
       [<c10c0965>] do_unlinkat+0xd5/0x160
       [<c1401068>] ? mutex_unlock+0x8/0x10
       [<c10c3e0d>] ? vfs_readdir+0x7d/0xb0
       [<c10c3af0>] ? filldir64+0x0/0xf0
       [<c1002ef3>] ? sysenter_exit+0xf/0x16
       [<c105cbe4>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x124/0x170
       [<c10c0b13>] sys_unlinkat+0x23/0x40
       [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
      Tested-by: NChristian Kujau <lists@nerdbynature.de>
      Cc: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
      Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
      Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      4dd85969
    • F
      reiserfs: Fix unwanted recursive reiserfs lock in reiserfs_unlink() · c674905c
      Frederic Weisbecker 提交于
      reiserfs_unlink() may or may not be called under the reiserfs
      lock.
      But it also takes the reiserfs lock and can then acquire it
      recursively which leads to do_journal_begin_r() that fails to
      relax the reiserfs lock before grabbing the journal mutex,
      creating an unexpected lock inversion.
      
      We need to ensure reiserfs_unlink() won't get the reiserfs lock
      recursively using reiserfs_write_lock_once().
      
      This fixes the following warning that precedes a lock inversion
      report (reiserfs lock <-> journal mutex).
      
      ------------[ cut here ]------------
      WARNING: at fs/reiserfs/lock.c:95 reiserfs_lock_check_recursive+0x3a/0x50()
      Hardware name: MS-7418
      Unwanted recursive reiserfs lock!
      Pid: 3208, comm: dbench Not tainted 2.6.32-atom #177
      Call Trace:
       [<c114327a>] ? reiserfs_lock_check_recursive+0x3a/0x50
       [<c114327a>] ? reiserfs_lock_check_recursive+0x3a/0x50
       [<c10373a7>] warn_slowpath_common+0x67/0xc0
       [<c114327a>] ? reiserfs_lock_check_recursive+0x3a/0x50
       [<c1037446>] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x26/0x30
       [<c114327a>] reiserfs_lock_check_recursive+0x3a/0x50
       [<c113c213>] do_journal_begin_r+0x83/0x360
       [<c105eb16>] ? __lock_acquire+0x1296/0x19e0
       [<c1142a57>] ? xattr_unlink+0x57/0xb0
       [<c113c670>] journal_begin+0x80/0x130
       [<c1116d5d>] reiserfs_unlink+0x7d/0x2d0
       [<c1142a57>] ? xattr_unlink+0x57/0xb0
       [<c1142a57>] ? xattr_unlink+0x57/0xb0
       [<c1142a57>] ? xattr_unlink+0x57/0xb0
       [<c1142a64>] xattr_unlink+0x64/0xb0
       [<c1143169>] delete_one_xattr+0x29/0x100
       [<c11427ab>] reiserfs_for_each_xattr+0x10b/0x290
       [<c1143140>] ? delete_one_xattr+0x0/0x100
       [<c1401ca9>] ? mutex_lock_nested+0x299/0x340
       [<c11429aa>] reiserfs_delete_xattrs+0x1a/0x60
       [<c11432f9>] ? reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
       [<c111ea1f>] reiserfs_delete_inode+0x9f/0x150
       [<c11b0d0f>] ? _atomic_dec_and_lock+0x4f/0x70
       [<c111e980>] ? reiserfs_delete_inode+0x0/0x150
       [<c10c9c32>] generic_delete_inode+0xa2/0x170
       [<c10c9d4f>] generic_drop_inode+0x4f/0x70
       [<c10c8b07>] iput+0x47/0x50
       [<c10c0965>] do_unlinkat+0xd5/0x160
       [<c10505c6>] ? up_read+0x16/0x30
       [<c1022ab7>] ? do_page_fault+0x187/0x330
       [<c1002fd8>] ? restore_all_notrace+0x0/0x18
       [<c1022930>] ? do_page_fault+0x0/0x330
       [<c105cbe4>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x124/0x170
       [<c10c0a00>] sys_unlink+0x10/0x20
       [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      ---[ end trace 2e35d71a6cc69d0c ]---
      Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
      Tested-by: NChristian Kujau <lists@nerdbynature.de>
      Cc: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
      Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
      Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      c674905c
    • F
      reiserfs: Relax lock before open xattr dir in reiserfs_xattr_set_handle() · 3f14fea6
      Frederic Weisbecker 提交于
      We call xattr_lookup() from reiserfs_xattr_get(). We then hold
      the reiserfs lock when we grab the i_mutex. But later, we may
      relax the reiserfs lock, creating dependency inversion between
      both locks.
      
      The lookups and creation jobs ar already protected by the
      inode mutex, so we can safely relax the reiserfs lock, dropping
      the unwanted reiserfs lock -> i_mutex dependency, as shown
      in the following lockdep report:
      
      =======================================================
      [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
      2.6.32-atom #173
      -------------------------------------------------------
      cp/3204 is trying to acquire lock:
       (&REISERFS_SB(s)->lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<c11432b9>] reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
      
      but task is already holding lock:
       (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4/3){+.+.+.}, at: [<c1141e18>] open_xa_dir+0xd8/0x1b0
      
      which lock already depends on the new lock.
      
      the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
      
      -> #1 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4/3){+.+.+.}:
             [<c105ea7f>] __lock_acquire+0x11ff/0x19e0
             [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
             [<c1401a2b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
             [<c1141d83>] open_xa_dir+0x43/0x1b0
             [<c1142722>] reiserfs_for_each_xattr+0x62/0x260
             [<c114299a>] reiserfs_delete_xattrs+0x1a/0x60
             [<c111ea1f>] reiserfs_delete_inode+0x9f/0x150
             [<c10c9c32>] generic_delete_inode+0xa2/0x170
             [<c10c9d4f>] generic_drop_inode+0x4f/0x70
             [<c10c8b07>] iput+0x47/0x50
             [<c10c0965>] do_unlinkat+0xd5/0x160
             [<c10c0a00>] sys_unlink+0x10/0x20
             [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      
      -> #0 (&REISERFS_SB(s)->lock){+.+.+.}:
             [<c105f176>] __lock_acquire+0x18f6/0x19e0
             [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
             [<c1401a2b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
             [<c11432b9>] reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
             [<c1117012>] reiserfs_lookup+0x62/0x140
             [<c10bd85f>] __lookup_hash+0xef/0x110
             [<c10bf21d>] lookup_one_len+0x8d/0xc0
             [<c1141e2a>] open_xa_dir+0xea/0x1b0
             [<c1141fe5>] xattr_lookup+0x15/0x160
             [<c1142476>] reiserfs_xattr_get+0x56/0x2a0
             [<c1144042>] reiserfs_get_acl+0xa2/0x360
             [<c114461a>] reiserfs_cache_default_acl+0x3a/0x160
             [<c111789c>] reiserfs_mkdir+0x6c/0x2c0
             [<c10bea96>] vfs_mkdir+0xd6/0x180
             [<c10c0c10>] sys_mkdirat+0xc0/0xd0
             [<c10c0c40>] sys_mkdir+0x20/0x30
             [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      
      other info that might help us debug this:
      
      2 locks held by cp/3204:
       #0:  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4/1){+.+.+.}, at: [<c10bd8d6>] lookup_create+0x26/0xa0
       #1:  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4/3){+.+.+.}, at: [<c1141e18>] open_xa_dir+0xd8/0x1b0
      
      stack backtrace:
      Pid: 3204, comm: cp Not tainted 2.6.32-atom #173
      Call Trace:
       [<c13ff993>] ? printk+0x18/0x1a
       [<c105d33a>] print_circular_bug+0xca/0xd0
       [<c105f176>] __lock_acquire+0x18f6/0x19e0
       [<c105d3aa>] ? check_usage+0x6a/0x460
       [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
       [<c11432b9>] ? reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
       [<c11432b9>] ? reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
       [<c1401a2b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
       [<c11432b9>] ? reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
       [<c11432b9>] reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
       [<c1117012>] reiserfs_lookup+0x62/0x140
       [<c105ccca>] ? debug_check_no_locks_freed+0x8a/0x140
       [<c105cbe4>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x124/0x170
       [<c10bd85f>] __lookup_hash+0xef/0x110
       [<c10bf21d>] lookup_one_len+0x8d/0xc0
       [<c1141e2a>] open_xa_dir+0xea/0x1b0
       [<c1141fe5>] xattr_lookup+0x15/0x160
       [<c1142476>] reiserfs_xattr_get+0x56/0x2a0
       [<c1144042>] reiserfs_get_acl+0xa2/0x360
       [<c10ca2e7>] ? new_inode+0x27/0xa0
       [<c114461a>] reiserfs_cache_default_acl+0x3a/0x160
       [<c1402eb7>] ? _spin_unlock+0x27/0x40
       [<c111789c>] reiserfs_mkdir+0x6c/0x2c0
       [<c10c7cb8>] ? __d_lookup+0x108/0x190
       [<c105c932>] ? mark_held_locks+0x62/0x80
       [<c1401c8d>] ? mutex_lock_nested+0x2bd/0x340
       [<c10bd17a>] ? generic_permission+0x1a/0xa0
       [<c11788fe>] ? security_inode_permission+0x1e/0x20
       [<c10bea96>] vfs_mkdir+0xd6/0x180
       [<c10c0c10>] sys_mkdirat+0xc0/0xd0
       [<c10505c6>] ? up_read+0x16/0x30
       [<c1002fd8>] ? restore_all_notrace+0x0/0x18
       [<c10c0c40>] sys_mkdir+0x20/0x30
       [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
      Tested-by: NChristian Kujau <lists@nerdbynature.de>
      Cc: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
      Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
      Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      3f14fea6
    • F
      reiserfs: Relax reiserfs lock while freeing the journal · 0523676d
      Frederic Weisbecker 提交于
      Keeping the reiserfs lock while freeing the journal on
      umount path triggers a lock inversion between bdev->bd_mutex
      and the reiserfs lock.
      
      We don't need the reiserfs lock at this stage. The filesystem
      is not usable anymore, and there are no more pending commits,
      everything got flushed (even this operation was done in parallel
      and didn't required the reiserfs lock from the current process).
      
      This fixes the following lockdep report:
      
      =======================================================
      [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
      2.6.32-atom #172
      -------------------------------------------------------
      umount/3904 is trying to acquire lock:
       (&bdev->bd_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<c10de2c2>] __blkdev_put+0x22/0x160
      
      but task is already holding lock:
       (&REISERFS_SB(s)->lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<c1143279>] reiserfs_write_lock+0x29/0x40
      
      which lock already depends on the new lock.
      
      the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
      
      -> #3 (&REISERFS_SB(s)->lock){+.+.+.}:
             [<c105ea7f>] __lock_acquire+0x11ff/0x19e0
             [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
             [<c140199b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
             [<c1143229>] reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
             [<c111c485>] reiserfs_get_block+0x85/0x1620
             [<c10e1040>] do_mpage_readpage+0x1f0/0x6d0
             [<c10e1640>] mpage_readpages+0xc0/0x100
             [<c1119b89>] reiserfs_readpages+0x19/0x20
             [<c108f1ec>] __do_page_cache_readahead+0x1bc/0x260
             [<c108f2b8>] ra_submit+0x28/0x40
             [<c1087e3e>] filemap_fault+0x40e/0x420
             [<c109b5fd>] __do_fault+0x3d/0x430
             [<c109d47e>] handle_mm_fault+0x12e/0x790
             [<c1022a65>] do_page_fault+0x135/0x330
             [<c1403663>] error_code+0x6b/0x70
             [<c10ef9ca>] load_elf_binary+0x82a/0x1a10
             [<c10ba130>] search_binary_handler+0x90/0x1d0
             [<c10bb70f>] do_execve+0x1df/0x250
             [<c1001746>] sys_execve+0x46/0x70
             [<c1002fa5>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
      
      -> #2 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}:
             [<c105ea7f>] __lock_acquire+0x11ff/0x19e0
             [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
             [<c109b1ab>] might_fault+0x8b/0xb0
             [<c11b8f52>] copy_to_user+0x32/0x70
             [<c10c3b94>] filldir64+0xa4/0xf0
             [<c1109116>] sysfs_readdir+0x116/0x210
             [<c10c3e1d>] vfs_readdir+0x8d/0xb0
             [<c10c3ea9>] sys_getdents64+0x69/0xb0
             [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      
      -> #1 (sysfs_mutex){+.+.+.}:
             [<c105ea7f>] __lock_acquire+0x11ff/0x19e0
             [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
             [<c140199b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
             [<c110951c>] sysfs_addrm_start+0x2c/0xb0
             [<c1109aa0>] create_dir+0x40/0x90
             [<c1109b1b>] sysfs_create_dir+0x2b/0x50
             [<c11b2352>] kobject_add_internal+0xc2/0x1b0
             [<c11b2531>] kobject_add_varg+0x31/0x50
             [<c11b25ac>] kobject_add+0x2c/0x60
             [<c1258294>] device_add+0x94/0x560
             [<c11036ea>] add_partition+0x18a/0x2a0
             [<c110418a>] rescan_partitions+0x33a/0x450
             [<c10de5bf>] __blkdev_get+0x12f/0x2d0
             [<c10de76a>] blkdev_get+0xa/0x10
             [<c11034b8>] register_disk+0x108/0x130
             [<c11a87a9>] add_disk+0xd9/0x130
             [<c12998e5>] sd_probe_async+0x105/0x1d0
             [<c10528af>] async_thread+0xcf/0x230
             [<c104bfd4>] kthread+0x74/0x80
             [<c1003aab>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x3c
      
      -> #0 (&bdev->bd_mutex){+.+.+.}:
             [<c105f176>] __lock_acquire+0x18f6/0x19e0
             [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
             [<c140199b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
             [<c10de2c2>] __blkdev_put+0x22/0x160
             [<c10de40a>] blkdev_put+0xa/0x10
             [<c113ce22>] free_journal_ram+0xd2/0x130
             [<c113ea18>] do_journal_release+0x98/0x190
             [<c113eb2a>] journal_release+0xa/0x10
             [<c1128eb6>] reiserfs_put_super+0x36/0x130
             [<c10b776f>] generic_shutdown_super+0x4f/0xe0
             [<c10b7825>] kill_block_super+0x25/0x40
             [<c11255df>] reiserfs_kill_sb+0x7f/0x90
             [<c10b7f4a>] deactivate_super+0x7a/0x90
             [<c10cccd8>] mntput_no_expire+0x98/0xd0
             [<c10ccfcc>] sys_umount+0x4c/0x310
             [<c10cd2a9>] sys_oldumount+0x19/0x20
             [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      
      other info that might help us debug this:
      
      2 locks held by umount/3904:
       #0:  (&type->s_umount_key#30){+++++.}, at: [<c10b7f45>] deactivate_super+0x75/0x90
       #1:  (&REISERFS_SB(s)->lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<c1143279>] reiserfs_write_lock+0x29/0x40
      
      stack backtrace:
      Pid: 3904, comm: umount Not tainted 2.6.32-atom #172
      Call Trace:
       [<c13ff903>] ? printk+0x18/0x1a
       [<c105d33a>] print_circular_bug+0xca/0xd0
       [<c105f176>] __lock_acquire+0x18f6/0x19e0
       [<c108b66f>] ? free_pcppages_bulk+0x1f/0x250
       [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
       [<c10de2c2>] ? __blkdev_put+0x22/0x160
       [<c10de2c2>] ? __blkdev_put+0x22/0x160
       [<c140199b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
       [<c10de2c2>] ? __blkdev_put+0x22/0x160
       [<c105c932>] ? mark_held_locks+0x62/0x80
       [<c10afe12>] ? kfree+0x92/0xd0
       [<c10de2c2>] __blkdev_put+0x22/0x160
       [<c105cc3b>] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xb/0x10
       [<c10de40a>] blkdev_put+0xa/0x10
       [<c113ce22>] free_journal_ram+0xd2/0x130
       [<c113ea18>] do_journal_release+0x98/0x190
       [<c113eb2a>] journal_release+0xa/0x10
       [<c1128eb6>] reiserfs_put_super+0x36/0x130
       [<c1050596>] ? up_write+0x16/0x30
       [<c10b776f>] generic_shutdown_super+0x4f/0xe0
       [<c10b7825>] kill_block_super+0x25/0x40
       [<c10f41e0>] ? vfs_quota_off+0x0/0x20
       [<c11255df>] reiserfs_kill_sb+0x7f/0x90
       [<c10b7f4a>] deactivate_super+0x7a/0x90
       [<c10cccd8>] mntput_no_expire+0x98/0xd0
       [<c10ccfcc>] sys_umount+0x4c/0x310
       [<c10cd2a9>] sys_oldumount+0x19/0x20
       [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
      Cc: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
      Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
      Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      0523676d
    • F
      reiserfs: Fix reiserfs lock <-> i_mutex dependency inversion on xattr · 27026a05
      Frederic Weisbecker 提交于
      While deleting the xattrs of an inode, we hold the reiserfs lock
      and grab the inode->i_mutex of the targeted inode and the root
      private xattr directory.
      
      Later on, we may relax the reiserfs lock for various reasons, this
      creates inverted dependencies.
      
      We can remove the reiserfs lock -> i_mutex dependency by relaxing
      the former before calling open_xa_dir(). This is fine because the
      lookup and creation of xattr private directories done in
      open_xa_dir() are covered by the targeted inode mutexes. And deeper
      operations in the tree are still done under the write lock.
      
      This fixes the following lockdep report:
      
      =======================================================
      [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
      2.6.32-atom #173
      -------------------------------------------------------
      cp/3204 is trying to acquire lock:
       (&REISERFS_SB(s)->lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<c11432b9>] reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
      
      but task is already holding lock:
       (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4/3){+.+.+.}, at: [<c1141e18>] open_xa_dir+0xd8/0x1b0
      
      which lock already depends on the new lock.
      
      the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
      
      -> #1 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4/3){+.+.+.}:
             [<c105ea7f>] __lock_acquire+0x11ff/0x19e0
             [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
             [<c1401a2b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
             [<c1141d83>] open_xa_dir+0x43/0x1b0
             [<c1142722>] reiserfs_for_each_xattr+0x62/0x260
             [<c114299a>] reiserfs_delete_xattrs+0x1a/0x60
             [<c111ea1f>] reiserfs_delete_inode+0x9f/0x150
             [<c10c9c32>] generic_delete_inode+0xa2/0x170
             [<c10c9d4f>] generic_drop_inode+0x4f/0x70
             [<c10c8b07>] iput+0x47/0x50
             [<c10c0965>] do_unlinkat+0xd5/0x160
             [<c10c0a00>] sys_unlink+0x10/0x20
             [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      
      -> #0 (&REISERFS_SB(s)->lock){+.+.+.}:
             [<c105f176>] __lock_acquire+0x18f6/0x19e0
             [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
             [<c1401a2b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
             [<c11432b9>] reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
             [<c1117012>] reiserfs_lookup+0x62/0x140
             [<c10bd85f>] __lookup_hash+0xef/0x110
             [<c10bf21d>] lookup_one_len+0x8d/0xc0
             [<c1141e2a>] open_xa_dir+0xea/0x1b0
             [<c1141fe5>] xattr_lookup+0x15/0x160
             [<c1142476>] reiserfs_xattr_get+0x56/0x2a0
             [<c1144042>] reiserfs_get_acl+0xa2/0x360
             [<c114461a>] reiserfs_cache_default_acl+0x3a/0x160
             [<c111789c>] reiserfs_mkdir+0x6c/0x2c0
             [<c10bea96>] vfs_mkdir+0xd6/0x180
             [<c10c0c10>] sys_mkdirat+0xc0/0xd0
             [<c10c0c40>] sys_mkdir+0x20/0x30
             [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      
      other info that might help us debug this:
      
      2 locks held by cp/3204:
       #0:  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4/1){+.+.+.}, at: [<c10bd8d6>] lookup_create+0x26/0xa0
       #1:  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#4/3){+.+.+.}, at: [<c1141e18>] open_xa_dir+0xd8/0x1b0
      
      stack backtrace:
      Pid: 3204, comm: cp Not tainted 2.6.32-atom #173
      Call Trace:
       [<c13ff993>] ? printk+0x18/0x1a
       [<c105d33a>] print_circular_bug+0xca/0xd0
       [<c105f176>] __lock_acquire+0x18f6/0x19e0
       [<c105d3aa>] ? check_usage+0x6a/0x460
       [<c105f2c8>] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
       [<c11432b9>] ? reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
       [<c11432b9>] ? reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
       [<c1401a2b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5b/0x340
       [<c11432b9>] ? reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
       [<c11432b9>] reiserfs_write_lock_once+0x29/0x50
       [<c1117012>] reiserfs_lookup+0x62/0x140
       [<c105ccca>] ? debug_check_no_locks_freed+0x8a/0x140
       [<c105cbe4>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x124/0x170
       [<c10bd85f>] __lookup_hash+0xef/0x110
       [<c10bf21d>] lookup_one_len+0x8d/0xc0
       [<c1141e2a>] open_xa_dir+0xea/0x1b0
       [<c1141fe5>] xattr_lookup+0x15/0x160
       [<c1142476>] reiserfs_xattr_get+0x56/0x2a0
       [<c1144042>] reiserfs_get_acl+0xa2/0x360
       [<c10ca2e7>] ? new_inode+0x27/0xa0
       [<c114461a>] reiserfs_cache_default_acl+0x3a/0x160
       [<c1402eb7>] ? _spin_unlock+0x27/0x40
       [<c111789c>] reiserfs_mkdir+0x6c/0x2c0
       [<c10c7cb8>] ? __d_lookup+0x108/0x190
       [<c105c932>] ? mark_held_locks+0x62/0x80
       [<c1401c8d>] ? mutex_lock_nested+0x2bd/0x340
       [<c10bd17a>] ? generic_permission+0x1a/0xa0
       [<c11788fe>] ? security_inode_permission+0x1e/0x20
       [<c10bea96>] vfs_mkdir+0xd6/0x180
       [<c10c0c10>] sys_mkdirat+0xc0/0xd0
       [<c10505c6>] ? up_read+0x16/0x30
       [<c1002fd8>] ? restore_all_notrace+0x0/0x18
       [<c10c0c40>] sys_mkdir+0x20/0x30
       [<c1002ec4>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x32
      
      v2: Don't drop reiserfs_mutex_lock_nested_safe() as we'll still
          need it later
      Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
      Tested-by: NChristian Kujau <lists@nerdbynature.de>
      Cc: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
      Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
      Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      27026a05
    • F
      reiserfs: Warn on lock relax if taken recursively · c4a62ca3
      Frederic Weisbecker 提交于
      When we relax the reiserfs lock to avoid creating unwanted
      dependencies against others locks while grabbing these,
      we want to ensure it has not been taken recursively, otherwise
      the lock won't be really relaxed. Only its depth will be decreased.
      The unwanted dependency would then actually happen.
      
      To prevent from that, add a reiserfs_lock_check_recursive() call
      in the places that need it.
      Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
      Cc: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
      Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
      Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      c4a62ca3
    • F
      reiserfs: Fix reiserfs lock <-> i_xattr_sem dependency inversion · 0719d343
      Frederic Weisbecker 提交于
      i_xattr_sem depends on the reiserfs lock. But after we grab
      i_xattr_sem, we may relax/relock the reiserfs lock while waiting
      on a freezed filesystem, creating a dependency inversion between
      the two locks.
      
      In order to avoid the i_xattr_sem -> reiserfs lock dependency, let's
      create a reiserfs_down_read_safe() that acts like
      reiserfs_mutex_lock_safe(): relax the reiserfs lock while grabbing
      another lock to avoid undesired dependencies induced by the
      heivyweight reiserfs lock.
      
      This fixes the following warning:
      
      [  990.005931] =======================================================
      [  990.012373] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
      [  990.013233] 2.6.33-rc1 #1
      [  990.013233] -------------------------------------------------------
      [  990.013233] dbench/1891 is trying to acquire lock:
      [  990.013233]  (&REISERFS_SB(s)->lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81159505>] reiserfs_write_lock+0x35/0x50
      [  990.013233]
      [  990.013233] but task is already holding lock:
      [  990.013233]  (&REISERFS_I(inode)->i_xattr_sem){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff8115899a>] reiserfs_xattr_set_handle+0x8a/0x470
      [  990.013233]
      [  990.013233] which lock already depends on the new lock.
      [  990.013233]
      [  990.013233]
      [  990.013233] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
      [  990.013233]
      [  990.013233] -> #1 (&REISERFS_I(inode)->i_xattr_sem){+.+.+.}:
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff81063afc>] __lock_acquire+0xf9c/0x1560
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff8106414f>] lock_acquire+0x8f/0xb0
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff814ac194>] down_write+0x44/0x80
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff8115899a>] reiserfs_xattr_set_handle+0x8a/0x470
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff81158e30>] reiserfs_xattr_set+0xb0/0x150
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff8115a6aa>] user_set+0x8a/0x90
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff8115901a>] reiserfs_setxattr+0xaa/0xb0
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff810e2596>] __vfs_setxattr_noperm+0x36/0xa0
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff810e26bc>] vfs_setxattr+0xbc/0xc0
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff810e2780>] setxattr+0xc0/0x150
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff810e289d>] sys_fsetxattr+0x8d/0xa0
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff81002dab>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
      [  990.013233]
      [  990.013233] -> #0 (&REISERFS_SB(s)->lock){+.+.+.}:
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff81063e30>] __lock_acquire+0x12d0/0x1560
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff8106414f>] lock_acquire+0x8f/0xb0
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff814aba77>] __mutex_lock_common+0x47/0x3b0
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff814abebe>] mutex_lock_nested+0x3e/0x50
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff81159505>] reiserfs_write_lock+0x35/0x50
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff811340e5>] reiserfs_prepare_write+0x45/0x180
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff81158bb6>] reiserfs_xattr_set_handle+0x2a6/0x470
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff81158e30>] reiserfs_xattr_set+0xb0/0x150
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff8115a6aa>] user_set+0x8a/0x90
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff8115901a>] reiserfs_setxattr+0xaa/0xb0
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff810e2596>] __vfs_setxattr_noperm+0x36/0xa0
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff810e26bc>] vfs_setxattr+0xbc/0xc0
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff810e2780>] setxattr+0xc0/0x150
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff810e289d>] sys_fsetxattr+0x8d/0xa0
      [  990.013233]        [<ffffffff81002dab>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
      [  990.013233]
      [  990.013233] other info that might help us debug this:
      [  990.013233]
      [  990.013233] 2 locks held by dbench/1891:
      [  990.013233]  #0:  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#12){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff810e2678>] vfs_setxattr+0x78/0xc0
      [  990.013233]  #1:  (&REISERFS_I(inode)->i_xattr_sem){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff8115899a>] reiserfs_xattr_set_handle+0x8a/0x470
      [  990.013233]
      [  990.013233] stack backtrace:
      [  990.013233] Pid: 1891, comm: dbench Not tainted 2.6.33-rc1 #1
      [  990.013233] Call Trace:
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff81061639>] print_circular_bug+0xe9/0xf0
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff81063e30>] __lock_acquire+0x12d0/0x1560
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff8115899a>] ? reiserfs_xattr_set_handle+0x8a/0x470
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff8106414f>] lock_acquire+0x8f/0xb0
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff81159505>] ? reiserfs_write_lock+0x35/0x50
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff8115899a>] ? reiserfs_xattr_set_handle+0x8a/0x470
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff814aba77>] __mutex_lock_common+0x47/0x3b0
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff81159505>] ? reiserfs_write_lock+0x35/0x50
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff81159505>] ? reiserfs_write_lock+0x35/0x50
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff81062592>] ? mark_held_locks+0x72/0xa0
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff814ab81d>] ? __mutex_unlock_slowpath+0xbd/0x140
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff810628ad>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x14d/0x1a0
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff814abebe>] mutex_lock_nested+0x3e/0x50
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff81159505>] reiserfs_write_lock+0x35/0x50
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff811340e5>] reiserfs_prepare_write+0x45/0x180
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff81158bb6>] reiserfs_xattr_set_handle+0x2a6/0x470
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff81158e30>] reiserfs_xattr_set+0xb0/0x150
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff814abcb4>] ? __mutex_lock_common+0x284/0x3b0
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff8115a6aa>] user_set+0x8a/0x90
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff8115901a>] reiserfs_setxattr+0xaa/0xb0
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff810e2596>] __vfs_setxattr_noperm+0x36/0xa0
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff810e26bc>] vfs_setxattr+0xbc/0xc0
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff810e2780>] setxattr+0xc0/0x150
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff81056018>] ? sched_clock_cpu+0xb8/0x100
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff8105eded>] ? trace_hardirqs_off+0xd/0x10
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff810560a3>] ? cpu_clock+0x43/0x50
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff810c6820>] ? fget+0xb0/0x110
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff810c6770>] ? fget+0x0/0x110
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff81002ddc>] ? sysret_check+0x27/0x62
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff810e289d>] sys_fsetxattr+0x8d/0xa0
      [  990.013233]  [<ffffffff81002dab>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
      Reported-and-tested-by: NChristian Kujau <lists@nerdbynature.de>
      Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
      Cc: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
      Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
      Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      0719d343
  4. 01 1月, 2010 13 次提交
  5. 31 12月, 2009 7 次提交
    • I
      dma-debug: Fix bug causing build warning · a8fe9ea2
      Ingo Molnar 提交于
      Stephen Rothwell reported the following build warning:
      
       lib/dma-debug.c: In function 'dma_debug_device_change':
       lib/dma-debug.c:680: warning: 'return' with no value, in function returning non-void
      
      Introduced by commit f797d988
      ("dma-debug: Do not add notifier when dma debugging is disabled").
      
      Return 0 [notify-done] when disabled. (this is standard bus notifier behavior.)
      Signed-off-by: NShaun Ruffell <sruffell@digium.com>
      Signed-off-by: NJoerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@amd.com>
      Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      Cc: <stable@kernel.org>
      LKML-Reference: <20091231125624.GA14666@liondog.tnic>
      Signed-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      a8fe9ea2
    • P
      perf: Fix NULL deref in inheritance code · 05cbaa28
      Peter Zijlstra 提交于
      Liming found a NULL deref when a task has a perf context but no
      counters  when it forks.
      
      This can occur in two cases, a race during construction where
      the fork hits after installing the context but before the first
      counter gets inserted, or more reproducably, a fork after the
      last counter is closed (which leaves the context around).
      Reported-by: NWang Liming <liming.wang@windriver.com>
      Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
      Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
      Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
      CC: <stable@kernel.org>
      LKML-Reference: <1262185684.7135.222.camel@laptop>
      Signed-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      05cbaa28
    • F
      perf: Pass appropriate frame pointer to dump_trace() · 48b5ba9c
      Frederic Weisbecker 提交于
      Pass the frame pointer from the regs of the interrupted path
      to dump_trace() while processing the stack trace.
      
      Currently, dump_trace() takes the current bp and starts the
      callchain from dump_trace() itself. This is wasteful because
      we need to walk through the entire NMI/DEBUG stack before
      retrieving the interrupted point.
      
      We can fix that by just using the frame pointer from the
      captured regs. It points exactly where we want to start.
      Signed-off-by: NFrederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
      Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
      Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
      Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
      LKML-Reference: <1262235183-5320-1-git-send-regression-fweisbec@gmail.com>
      Signed-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
      Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
      Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
      48b5ba9c
    • L
      Merge branch 'release' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lenb/linux-acpi-2.6 · 08d869aa
      Linus Torvalds 提交于
      * 'release' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lenb/linux-acpi-2.6:
        ACPI: introduce kernel parameter acpi_sleep=sci_force_enable
        ACPI: WMI: Survive BIOS with duplicate GUIDs
        dell-wmi - fix condition to abort driver loading
        wmi: check find_guid() return value to prevent oops
        dell-wmi, hp-wmi, msi-wmi: check wmi_get_event_data() return value
        ACPI: hp-wmi, msi-wmi: clarify that wmi_install_notify_handler() returns an acpi_status
        dell-wmi: sys_init_module: 'dell_wmi'->init suspiciously returned 21, it should
        ACPI video: correct error-handling code
        ACPI video: no warning message if "acpi_backlight=vendor" is used
        ACPI: fix ACPI=n allmodconfig build
        thinkpad-acpi: improve Kconfig help text
        thinkpad-acpi: update volume subdriver documentation
        thinkpad-acpi: make volume subdriver optional
        thinkpad-acpi: don't fail to load the entire module due to ALSA problems
        thinkpad-acpi: don't take the first ALSA slot by default
      08d869aa
    • L
      Merge branch 'resume-sci-force-bootparam' into release · 1201b2a9
      Len Brown 提交于
      1201b2a9
    • Z
      ACPI: introduce kernel parameter acpi_sleep=sci_force_enable · d7f0eea9
      Zhang Rui 提交于
      Introduce kernel parameter acpi_sleep=sci_force_enable
      
      some laptop requires SCI_EN being set directly on resume,
      or else they hung somewhere in the resume code path.
      
      We already have a blacklist for these laptops but we still need
      this option, especially when debugging some suspend/resume problems,
      in case there are systems that need this workaround and are not yet
      in the blacklist.
      Signed-off-by: NZhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
      Acked-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
      Signed-off-by: NLen Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
      d7f0eea9
    • L
      Merge branch 'fixes' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/djbw/async_tx · 05a62548
      Linus Torvalds 提交于
      * 'fixes' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/djbw/async_tx:
        drivers/dma: Correct use after free
        drivers/dma: drop unnecesary memset
        ioat2,3: put channel hardware in known state at init
        async_tx: expand async raid6 test to cover ioatdma corner case
        ioat3: fix p-disabled q-continuation
        sh: fix DMA driver's descriptor chaining and cookie assignment
        dma: at_hdmac: correct incompatible type for argument 1 of 'spin_lock_bh'
      05a62548