[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070108100350.1187a3dc@freekitty>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 10:03:50 -0800
From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...l.org>
To: Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
Cc: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...pl>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, dlstevens@...ibm.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#0! (2.6.18.2 plus hacks)
On Mon, 08 Jan 2007 08:57:10 -0800
Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com> wrote:
> Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 12:33:43PM -0800, Ben Greear wrote:
> > ...
> >
> >> So, I do believe this was the problem we were hitting, and it seems fixed.
> >>
> >
> > Congratulations!
> >
> > But I can see one strange thing in vlan.c:
> >
> > /* Must be invoked with RCU read lock (no preempt) */
> > static struct vlan_group *__vlan_find_group(int real_dev_ifindex)
> > ...
> > * Must be invoked with RCU read lock (no preempt)
> > */
> > struct net_device *__find_vlan_dev(struct net_device *real_dev,
> > ...
> >
> > But later in this file no sign of disabling preemption
> > for these calls and for hlist_add_head_rcu and hlist_del_rcu.
> >
> > I can't imagine how this works?
Preempt is already disabled on the receive path.
> >
> Perhaps...I didn't RCU-ify VLANs, but I can take a look.
>
> For the record, the soft lockup was using MAC-VLANs, not 802.1Q VLANs,
> so it wouldn't
> have been affected by bugs in VLANs one way or the other.
>
> Ben
>
> > Jarek P.
> >
>
>
--
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...l.org>
-
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