linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.37-git5 -- INFO: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 12 Jan 2011 10:26:53 +0100
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	Miles Lane <miles.lane@...il.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
	Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: 2.6.37-git5 -- INFO: possible irq lock inversion dependency
 detected

On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 15:10 -0500, Miles Lane wrote:
> [ INFO: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected ]
> 2.6.37-git5 #1
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> dbus-daemon/1512 just changed the state of lock:
>  (&(&list->lock)->rlock#7){+.-...}, at: [<ffffffffa01d4ecc>]
> ieee80211_rx_handlers+0x36/0x1ae3 [mac80211]
> but this lock was taken by another, HARDIRQ-safe lock in the past:
>  (&(&priv->lock)->rlock){-.-...}
> 
> and interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them.

Thanks Miles. I'm not sure I fully understand this trace, but I think
you can probably easily reproduce it. Would you be willing to test with
the patch on this email? I think it's related:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/62842/focus=62848

johannes

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/