-
Peter Zijlstra authored
rmmod/3080 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: (proc_subdir_lock){--..}, at: [<c04a33b0>] remove_proc_entry+0x40/0x191 and this task is already holding: (ide_lock){++..}, at: [<c05651a2>] ide_unregister_subdriver+0x39/0xc8 which would create a new lock dependency: (ide_lock){++..} -> (proc_subdir_lock){--..} but this new dependency connects a hard-irq-safe lock: (ide_lock){++..} ... which became hard-irq-safe at: [<c043c458>] lock_acquire+0x4b/0x6b [<c06129d7>] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x22/0x32 [<c0567870>] ide_intr+0x17/0x1a9 [<c044eb31>] handle_IRQ_event+0x20/0x4d [<c044ebf2>] __do_IRQ+0x94/0xef [<c0406771>] do_IRQ+0x9e/0xbd to a hard-irq-unsafe lock: (proc_subdir_lock){--..} ... which became hard-irq-unsafe at: ... [<c043c458>] lock_acquire+0x4b/0x6b [<c06126ab>] _spin_lock+0x19/0x28 [<c04a32f2>] xlate_proc_name+0x1b/0x99 [<c04a3547>] proc_create+0x46/0xdf [<c04a3642>] create_proc_entry+0x62/0xa5 [<c07c1972>] proc_misc_init+0x1c/0x1d2 [<c07c1844>] proc_root_init+0x4c/0xe9 [<c07ad703>] start_kernel+0x294/0x3b3 Move ide_remove_proc_entries() out from under ide_lock; there is nothing that indicates that this is needed. In specific, the call to ide_add_proc_entries() is unprotected, and there is nothing else in the file using the respective ->proc fields. Also the lock order around destroy_proc_ide_interface() suggests this. Alan sayeth: proc_ide_write_settings walks the setting list under ide_setting_sem, read ditto. remove_proc_entry is doing proc side housekeeping. Looks fine to me, although that old code is such a mess anything could be going on. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
9a2239b1