Distribution: Arch Linux Hardware Environment: 845 Chipset, HDD connected via ATA Port. Software Environment: Problem Description: Upon shutdown, while trying to unmount the filesystems, my system hangs. Message is (excerpt): Soft lockup detected on CPU#0! inotify_unmount_inodes+0x2d/0x110 Steps to reproduce:
Was there no stack trace?
What are the types of your filesystem(s) ? And, echoing Andrew, can we get a full backtrace?
Filesystems are ext3. The complete text that was on the screen (is that a "trace"?) [17205917.092000] BUG: Soft lockup detected on CPU#0! [17205917.092000] Pid: 29301, comm: umount [17205917.092000] EIP: 0060: [<c01974b7>] CPU:0 [17205917.092000] EIP is at inotify_unmount_inodex +0x27/0x110 [17205917.092000] EFLAGS: 00000202 Tainted: PF (2.6.12-mm1-ARCH) [17205917.092000] EAX: caa228d4 EBX: c88f3f0c ECX: 00000001 EDX: caa228d4 [17205917.092000] ESI: caa22784 EDI: caa228c4 EBP: caa22784 DS: 007b ES: 007b [17205917.092000] CR0: 8005003b CR2: b7f19000 CR3: 18ed9000 CR4: 000006d0 [17205917.092000] [<c0187e90>] invalidate_inodex+0x40/0x80 [17205917.092000] [<c0171ea0>] generic_shutdown_super+0x70/0x180 [17205917.092000] [<c0172b6e>] kill_block_super+0x2e/0x50 [17205917.092000] [<c0171d61>] deativate_super+0x61/0x80 [17205917.092000] [<c018b4ef>] sys_unmount+0x3f/0xa0 [17205917.092000] [<c018b545>] sys_oldumount+0x15/0x20 [17205917.092000] [<c01031ab>] sysenter_past_esp+0x54/0x75
What patches have you applied to your kernel? Had you used inotify while the system was up?
What is the -ARCH patch? Can you try to reproduce with just 2.6.12+inotify?
Created attachment 5217 [details] inotify for 2.6.12
It's really just the 2.6.12 kernel with the mm patchset applied. I didn't compile the kernel myself, it's the kernel26mm package from Arch Linux. So "-ARCH" is NO patch, it's just an identifier for the kernel. You can find the config file and the build script at http://cvs.archlinux.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/kernels/kernel26mm/?cvsroot=Extra&only_with_tag=CURRENT Also, I do use inotify: beagled is running and a gamin compiled with inotify support.
Ah, okay. Fair enough. We were--are still--curious why you'd soft lockup there (I presume that is some NMI watchdog thing). The loop should complete fine. Hm...
OK, some further information. As of today, there is a new kernel package in Arch's testing repository. It's a 2.6.12.1 kernel, patched with inotify 0.23. With this one, I experience the same problems on shutdown. It does however not give any information like the one I posted earlier, it just hangs. If I boot into the system w/o logging in (and thus running beagled and gamin) and shut down again, it works fine. So it clearly only happens when some application used inotify. I did test it with beagled run from a command line. After that, again, I couldn't shut down the system.
It also happens when I only use gamin, but not beagled. So the type of application using inotify doesn't seem to matter. Also, (not surprising), it is upon unmounting my /home partition the system crashes, for the / partition is never recovering journals upon the next boot. There is an entry in Arch Linux' Bugtracker for the same subject now: http://bugs.archlinux.org/index.php?do=details&id=2887
Alexander, could you try and reproduce with the patch robert just released?
Did try with the newest inotify patch. Problem persists.
Created attachment 5266 [details] Patch to fix the hangs on umount. This patch fixes the hangs at umount triggered by inotify.
Comment on attachment 5266 [details] Patch to fix the hangs on umount. Hm, I think IE on Mac OS 9 ate the whitespace. Will post a url instead...
Create a New Attachment -> URL fails for me as it keeps saying there is no file specified! so here is the URL for the patch. This should hopefully have the whitespace intact: http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/7/4/149
What are the plans for this one? Is it going to be integrated in the next inotify patch?
It is already in the latest inotify patch.
Robert, is it possible to publish an up to date patch against the stable kernel 2.6.12.2?
I think we can close this one, yes?
Yes.