From 7f1b43936f0ecad14770634c021cf4a929aec74d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Peter Zijlstra Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 21:19:46 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] sched/rt: Fix lockdep annotation within find_lock_lowest_rq() Roland Dreier reported spurious, hard to trigger lockdep warnings within the scheduler - without any real lockup. This bit gives us the right clue: > [89945.640512] [] double_lock_balance+0x5a/0x90 > [89945.640568] [] push_rt_task+0xc6/0x290 if you look at that code you'll find the double_lock_balance() in question is the one in find_lock_lowest_rq() [yay for inlining]. Now find_lock_lowest_rq() has a bug.. it fails to use double_unlock_balance() in one exit path, if this results in a retry in push_rt_task() we'll call double_lock_balance() again, at which point we'll run into said lockdep confusion. Reported-by: Roland Dreier Acked-by: Steven Rostedt Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1337282386.4281.77.camel@twins Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- kernel/sched/rt.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/kernel/sched/rt.c b/kernel/sched/rt.c index 2a4e8dffbd6b..573e1ca01102 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/rt.c +++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c @@ -1562,7 +1562,7 @@ static struct rq *find_lock_lowest_rq(struct task_struct *task, struct rq *rq) task_running(rq, task) || !task->on_rq)) { - raw_spin_unlock(&lowest_rq->lock); + double_unlock_balance(rq, lowest_rq); lowest_rq = NULL; break; } -- 2.20.1