netdev - Re: 2.6.23-rc4-mm1: e1000e napi lockup

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <46E1E456.8020605@intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 07 Sep 2007 16:52:54 -0700
From:	"Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>
To:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, jirislaby@...il.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: 2.6.23-rc4-mm1: e1000e napi lockup

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Kok, Auke wrote:
>> Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>> Kok, Auke wrote:
>>>> David Miller wrote:
>>>>> From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
>>>>> Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2007 09:19:30 +0200
>>>>>
>>>>>> I found a regression in 2.6.23-rc4-mm1 (since -rc3-mm1) in e1000e 
>>>>>> driver.
>>>>>> napi_disable(&adapter->napi) in e1000_probe freezes the kernel on 
>>>>>> boot.
>>>>> Yes, the semantics changed slightly in the net-2.6.24 tree the
>>>>> other week and someone needs to fix it up.
>>>>>
>>>>> The netif_napi_add() implicitly does a napi_disable() call.  Device
>>>>> open must explicitly napi_enable() and device close must explicitly
>>>>> napi_disable(), and if done elsewhere these calls must be strictly
>>>>> balanced.
>>>> I'll fix it... it's my patch that adds the new napi code to it and I 
>>>> need to get it ready for the merge window anyway.
>>> well....  since its close to the merge window opening, we could see 
>>> what happens if DaveM pulls branch 'upstream' of 
>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jgarzik/netdev-2.6.git
>>>
>>> That should make this class of pre-merge-window annoyance go away.
>> If I do that now I get a big merge conflict:
> 
> oh you are _guaranteed_ conflicts.  most of that is NAPI-area code that 
> got changed by both.


actually that's the only thing it was, and fixing it up was trivial (took me 
about 3 minutes). it was 3x the napi code and once a struct indent change...

I'll have a new e1000e napi patch for andrew in a sec.

Auke
-
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