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  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]
Date:	Mon, 10 Sep 2007 21:00:24 +0800
From:	Herbert Xu <>
To:	Christian Kujau <>
	jamal <>
Subject: Re: 2.6.23-rc5: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected

On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 01:11:29PM +0000, Christian Kujau wrote:
> after upgrading to 2.6.23-rc5 (and applying davem's fix [0]), lockdep 
> was quite noisy when I tried to shape my external (wireless) interface:
> [ 6400.534545] FahCore_78.exe/3552 just changed the state of lock:
> [ 6400.534713]  (&dev->ingress_lock){-+..}, at: [<c038d595>] 
> netif_receive_skb+0x2d5/0x3c0
> [ 6400.534941] but this lock took another, soft-read-irq-unsafe lock in the 
> past:
> [ 6400.535145]  (police_lock){-.--}

This is a genuine dead-lock.  The police lock can be taken
for reading with softirqs on.  If a second CPU tries to take
the police lock for writing, while holding the ingress lock,
then a softirq on the first CPU can dead-lock when it tries
to get the ingress lock.

The minimal fix would be to make sure that we disable BH on
the first CPU.  Jamal, could you take a look at this please?

Visit Openswan at
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <>
Home Page:
PGP Key:
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists