Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 26 Jul 2022 11:41:34 +0100 | From | Sudeep Holla <> | Subject | [-next] Lockdep warnings |
| |
I was seeing the below lockdep warnings on my arm64 Juno development platform almost 2 weeks back with -next. I wanted to check for similar reports before post and forgot.
--->8
DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(lockdep_hardirqs_enabled()) hardirqs last enabled at (46157): cpuidle_enter_state+0x174/0x2b4 WARNING: CPU: 5 PID: 0 at kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5506 check_flags+0x90/0x1e8 hardirqs last disabled at (46158): el1_interrupt+0x2c/0xc8 Modules linked in: softirqs last enabled at (46154): __do_softirq+0x2c0/0x388 softirqs last disabled at (46139): __irq_exit_rcu+0x118/0x18c CPU: 5 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/5 Not tainted 5.19.0-rc6-next-20220714 #9 pstate: 600000c5 (nZCv daIF -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) pc : check_flags+0x90/0x1e8 lr : check_flags+0x90/0x1e8 Call trace: check_flags+0x90/0x1e8 lock_is_held_type+0x80/0x164 rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x40/0x7c trace_rcu_dyntick+0x5c/0x140 ct_kernel_enter+0x78/0xd4 ct_idle_exit+0x1c/0x44 cpu_idle_poll+0x74/0xb8 do_idle+0x90/0x2c4 cpu_startup_entry+0x30/0x34 secondary_start_kernel+0x130/0x144 __secondary_switched+0xb0/0xb4 irq event stamp: 64229 hardirqs last enabled at (64229): cpu_idle_poll+0x40/0xb8 hardirqs last disabled at (64228): do_idle+0xbc/0x2c4 softirqs last enabled at (64190): __do_softirq+0x2c0/0x388 softirqs last disabled at (64185): __irq_exit_rcu+0x118/0x18c ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- possible reason: unannotated irqs-off. irq event stamp: 64229 hardirqs last enabled at (64229): cpu_idle_poll+0x40/0xb8 hardirqs last disabled at (64228): do_idle+0xbc/0x2c4 softirqs last enabled at (64190): __do_softirq+0x2c0/0x388 softirqs last disabled at (64185): __irq_exit_rcu+0x118/0x18c
----
However I don't see the above warning with the latest -next. When I tried yesterday's -next now, I see a different warning. Not sure if they are related. I haven't tried to bisect.
--->8 ============================= [ BUG: Invalid wait context ] 5.19.0-rc8-next-20220725 #38 Not tainted ----------------------------- swapper/0/0 is trying to lock: (&drvdata->spinlock){....}-{3:3}, at: cti_cpu_pm_notify+0x54/0x114 other info that might help us debug this: context-{5:5} 1 lock held by swapper/0/0: #0: (cpu_pm_notifier.lock){....}-{2:2}, at: cpu_pm_enter+0x2c/0x80 stack backtrace: CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.19.0-rc8-next-20220725-00004-g599e6691ed8c #38 Call trace: dump_backtrace+0xe8/0x108 show_stack+0x18/0x4c dump_stack_lvl+0x90/0xc8 dump_stack+0x18/0x54 __lock_acquire+0xa70/0x32d0 lock_acquire+0x160/0x308 _raw_spin_lock+0x60/0xa0 cti_cpu_pm_notify+0x54/0x114 raw_notifier_call_chain_robust+0x50/0xd4 cpu_pm_enter+0x48/0x80 psci_enter_idle_state+0x34/0x74 cpuidle_enter_state+0x120/0x2a8 cpuidle_enter+0x38/0x50 do_idle+0x1e8/0x2b8 cpu_startup_entry+0x24/0x28 kernel_init+0x0/0x1a0 start_kernel+0x0/0x470 start_kernel+0x34c/0x470 __primary_switched+0xbc/0xc4
----
-- Regards, Sudeep
| |