Messages in this thread | | | From | Mikhail Gavrilov <> | Date | Tue, 26 Jul 2022 17:32:54 +0500 | Subject | BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS too low! |
| |
Hi guys. Always with intensive writing on a btrfs volume, the message "BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS too low!" appears in the kernel logs.
[46729.134549] BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS too low! [46729.134557] turning off the locking correctness validator. [46729.134559] Please attach the output of /proc/lock_stat to the bug report [46729.134561] CPU: 22 PID: 166516 Comm: ThreadPoolForeg Tainted: G W L -------- --- 5.19.0-0.rc7.20220722git68e77ffbfd06.56.fc37.x86_64 #1 [46729.134566] Hardware name: System manufacturer System Product Name/ROG STRIX X570-I GAMING, BIOS 4403 04/27/2022 [46729.134569] Call Trace: [46729.134572] <TASK> [46729.134576] dump_stack_lvl+0x5b/0x77 [46729.134583] __lock_acquire.cold+0x167/0x29e [46729.134594] lock_acquire+0xce/0x2d0 [46729.134599] ? btrfs_reserve_extent+0xbd/0x250 [46729.134606] ? btrfs_get_alloc_profile+0x17e/0x240 [46729.134611] btrfs_get_alloc_profile+0x19c/0x240 [46729.134614] ? btrfs_reserve_extent+0xbd/0x250 [46729.134618] btrfs_reserve_extent+0xbd/0x250 [46729.134629] btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0xa3/0x510 [46729.134635] ? release_extent_buffer+0xa7/0xe0 [46729.134643] split_node+0x131/0x3d0 [46729.134652] btrfs_search_slot+0x2f3/0xc30 [46729.134659] ? btrfs_insert_inode_ref+0x50/0x3b0 [46729.134664] btrfs_insert_empty_items+0x31/0x70 [46729.134669] btrfs_insert_inode_ref+0x99/0x3b0 [46729.134678] btrfs_rename2+0x317/0x1510 [46729.134690] ? vfs_rename+0x49d/0xd20 [46729.134693] ? btrfs_symlink+0x460/0x460 [46729.134696] vfs_rename+0x49d/0xd20 [46729.134705] ? do_renameat2+0x4a0/0x510 [46729.134709] do_renameat2+0x4a0/0x510 [46729.134720] __x64_sys_rename+0x3f/0x50 [46729.134724] do_syscall_64+0x5b/0x80 [46729.134729] ? memcg_slab_free_hook+0x1fd/0x2e0 [46729.134735] ? do_faccessat+0x111/0x260 [46729.134739] ? kmem_cache_free+0x379/0x3d0 [46729.134744] ? lock_is_held_type+0xe8/0x140 [46729.134749] ? do_syscall_64+0x67/0x80 [46729.134752] ? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0x7d/0x100 [46729.134757] ? do_syscall_64+0x67/0x80 [46729.134760] ? asm_exc_page_fault+0x22/0x30 [46729.134764] ? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0x7d/0x100 [46729.134768] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd [46729.134773] RIP: 0033:0x7fd2a29b5afb [46729.134798] Code: e8 7a 27 0a 00 f7 d8 19 c0 5b c3 0f 1f 40 00 b8 ff ff ff ff 5b c3 66 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 f3 0f 1e fa b8 52 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 05 c3 0f 1f 40 00 48 8b 15 f1 82 17 00 f7 d8 [46729.134801] RSP: 002b:00007fd25b70a5a8 EFLAGS: 00000282 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000052 [46729.134805] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007fd25b70a5e0 RCX: 00007fd2a29b5afb [46729.134808] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 00003ba01ef60820 RDI: 00003ba00e4b2da0 [46729.134810] RBP: 00007fd25b70a660 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00007fd25b70a570 [46729.134812] R10: 00007ffd36b1f080 R11: 0000000000000282 R12: 00007fd25b70a5b8 [46729.134815] R13: 00003ba00e4b2da0 R14: 00007fd25b70a6c4 R15: 00003ba01ef60820 [46729.134823] </TASK>
In this regard, I want to ask, is this really a bug? The kernel version is 5.19-rc7.
Here's the full kernel log: https://pastebin.com/hYWH7RHu Here's /proc/lock_stat: https://pastebin.com/ex5w0QW9
-- Best Regards, Mike Gavrilov.
| |