[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100814.221035.229735667.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 22:10:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com
Subject: Re: [GIT] Networking
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 22:09:45 -0700 (PDT)
Umm, didn't actually CC: Eric, doing that now :-)
> From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 11:05:54 -0700
>
>> Anyway, the lock warning I do get seems to be networking-related, and
>> is appended. Does this ring any bells? It could easily be something
>> old: I turn on lock debugging only when I look for bugs (or when
>> people point out bugs that I've created :^/ )
>
> This is a false positive but I have no idea how we can annotate
> this to not trigger in lockdep.
>
> These are per-cpu locks for counter management.
>
> The get_counters() code knows that the locks for other cpu's counters
> can only be taken in software interrupt context of that other cpu. So
> it is legal to turn software interrupts back on when grabbing their
> locks in base context.
>
> CC:'ing Eric Dumazet since he put the code the way it is now :-)
> Via commit 24b36f0193467fa727b85b4c004016a8dae999b9
> ("netfilter: {ip,ip6,arp}_tables: dont block bottom half more than necessary")
> --
> 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/
--
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