netdev - Re: suspend warning with 3c59x

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:	Tue, 14 Sep 2010 18:52:24 +0300
From:	"Andrew O. Shadoura" <bugzilla@....by>
To:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Denis Kirjanov <dkirjanov@...nel.org>, ben@...adent.org.uk
Subject: Re: suspend warning with 3c59x

Hello.

On Tuesday 14 September 2010 18:32:40 you wrote:
> I have got a warning with the 3c59.
> (reproduced with pm-suspend)
> 
> [  254.214993] 3c59x 0000:00:0d.0: PME# enabled
> [  254.215021] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
> kernel/mutex.c:94
> [  254.215030] in_atomic(): 0, irqs_disabled(): 1, pid: 4875, name: ethtool
> [  254.215042] Pid: 4875, comm: ethtool Tainted: G    
>    W   2.6.36-rc3+ #7 [  254.215049] Call Trace:
 
> Warning introduced with commit 690a1f2002a3091bd18a501f46c9530f10481463:
> 3c59x: Add ethtool WOL support

> vortex_set_wol protected with a spinlock, but nested  acpi_set_WOL acquires
> a mutex inside atomic context. Do we really need to protect .set_wol with
> a vp->lock at all?

Yes, that was my mistake, we do not actually need it.

-- 
WBR, Andrew

Download attachment "signature.asc " of type "application/pgp-signature" (198 bytes)