[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081119101441.GB6184@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 11:14:41 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: jarkao2@...il.com, jeff@...zik.org, johannes@...solutions.net,
wferi@...f.hu, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] netconsole: Disable softirqs in write_msg()
* David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:30:04 +0100
>
> > * Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/netconsole.c b/drivers/net/netconsole.c
> > > index d304d38..f6ecad8 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/net/netconsole.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/netconsole.c
> > > @@ -702,6 +702,8 @@ static void write_msg(struct console *con, const char *msg, unsigned int len)
> > > if (list_empty(&target_list))
> > > return;
> > >
> > > + /* Avoid enabling softirqs with hardirqs disabled */
> > > + local_bh_disable();
> > > spin_lock_irqsave(&target_list_lock, flags);
> > > list_for_each_entry(nt, &target_list, list) {
> > > netconsole_target_get(nt);
> > > @@ -723,6 +725,7 @@ static void write_msg(struct console *con, const char *msg, unsigned int len)
> > > netconsole_target_put(nt);
> > > }
> > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&target_list_lock, flags);
> > > + local_bh_enable();
> >
> > but netconsole can be triggered from printk - and printk can be called
> > from hardirqs-off sections - so this doesnt really fix the bug.
> > Netconsole should not do BH processing.
>
> Well, it sort of "has to". It calls the NAPI ->poll() method of the
> driver to try and make forward progress with TX reclaim so it can
> send new messages.
>
> It is very careful not to recursively invoke into ->poll() and other
> nasty situations.
>
> Didn't you write some of this code Ingo a very long time ago? :-)))
it is causing problems, so i'd like to distance myself from that
careless mistake of my youth! [ And once it starts working again i'd
like to take credit for having started that brilliant piece of
innovation. ]
> Anyways, I'll look more closely at this and the original report,
> this never was a problem before.
Thanks! We strengthened/cleaned up the bh checks a tiny bit recently,
maybe that caused this to pop up. It might explain some netconsole
lockups perhaps? Or, the new warning might be bogus. It's a bit of a
maze.
Ingo
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists