| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <E1H2GVF-0008GJ-00@gondolin.me.apana.org.au>
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 11:30:41 +1100
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To: dlstevens@...ibm.com (David Stevens)
Cc: greearb@...delatech.com, jarkao2@...pl, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#0! (2.6.18.2 plus hacks)
David Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Ben,
> Here's a patch that I think will fix it, assuming the receive is
> on the
> same device as the initialization. Can you try this out?
Hi David:
Your patch makes sense on its own but I don't see the direct connection
to the soft lock-up. Sure it prevents the code path in question from
triggering. However, if we don't understand why it's locking up in the
first place then this may just be hiding it rather than fixing it.
In particular, a soft lockup means that we're doing so much work in
the softirq handlers that processes are not getting run. So what is
it exactly here that's causing us to get stuck in the softirq handlers?
Is it because we're somehow getting stuck in a net rx loop?
Cheers,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists