Lockdep complains that after rq_repin_lock() the lock wasn't unpinned before rq->lock release.
------------[ cut here ]------------ releasing a pinned lock WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 24 at kernel/locking/lockdep.c:4271 lock_release+0x939/0xee0 Call Trace: _raw_spin_unlock+0x1c/0x30 load_balance+0x1472/0x2e30 pick_next_task_fair+0x62c/0x2300 __schedule+0x481/0x1600 schedule+0xbf/0x240 worker_thread+0x1d5/0xb50 kthread+0x30e/0x3d0 ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50 Add rq_unpin_lock(); call to fix this. Also for consistency use 'busiest' instead of 'env.src_rq' which is the same. https://jira.sw.ru/browse/PSBM-120800 Signed-off-by: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabi...@virtuozzo.com> --- kernel/sched/fair.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c index fc87dee4fd0e..23a2f2452474 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c @@ -9178,9 +9178,10 @@ static int load_balance(int this_cpu, struct rq *this_rq, env.loop = 0; local_irq_save(rf.flags); double_rq_lock(env.dst_rq, busiest); - rq_repin_lock(env.src_rq, &rf); + rq_repin_lock(busiest, &rf); update_rq_clock(env.dst_rq); cur_ld_moved = ld_moved = move_task_groups(&env); + rq_unpin_lock(busiest, &rf); double_rq_unlock(env.dst_rq, busiest); local_irq_restore(rf.flags); } -- 2.26.2 _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@openvz.org https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
