netdev - Re: Inconsistent lock state and possible irq lock inversion dependency detected in ax25.ko

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Tue, 04 Dec 2007 23:26:52 +0100
From:	Bernard Pidoux <pidoux@....jussieu.fr>
To:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...pl>
CC:	ralf@...ux-mips.org, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Inconsistent lock  state and possible irq lock inversion dependency
 detected in ax25.ko


Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> Bernard Pidoux wrote, On 12/02/2007 06:37 PM:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> Many thanks for your patch for ~/net/ax25/ax25_subr.c
>>
>> Introduction of local_bh_disable() ... local_bh_enable()
>>
>> cured the inconsistent lock state related to AX25 connect timeout.
>>
>> I have now a stable monoprocessor system running AX25 and ROSE network 
>> packet switching application FPAC, whether kernel is compiled with or 
>> without hack option.
>>
>> There is no more problem during normal operations.
>>
>> This was achieved, thanks to your AX25 patch and the patch from Alexey 
>> Dobriyan for rose module.
>>
>> I also patched rose module in order to get packet routing more 
>> efficient, taking into account the "restarted" flag that is raised when 
>> a neighbour node is already connected.
>>
>> To summarize the present situation on my Linux machine, I built a patch 
>> against kernel 2.6.23.9.
>>
>> I would appreciate if you could make it included into a next kernel release.
> ... 
> 
> Bernard, I'm very glad I could be a little helpful, but I'm not sure of
> your intentions: my patch proposal is rather trivial interpretation of
> lockdep's report; I haven't studied AX25 enough even to be sure there is
> a real lockup possible in this place. Since this change looks not very
> costly and quite safe, I can 'take a risk' to sign this off after your
> testing. But anything more is beyond my 'range'.
> 
> So, since you've spent quite a lot of time on this all, maybe it would
> be simpler if you've tried the same with the current kernel, and resent
> "proper" (not gzipped and with changelog) patch or patches. Then, I hope,
> Ralf, as the maintainer, will make the rest.
> 
> Regards,
> Jarek P.
> 
> 

As required I send again in clear text the summary of ax25 and rose 
patch against 2.6.23.9.
As I said, the kernel stability, after applying these patch, is behind us.
I did not observe any warning nor lockup after a few days of AX25 
intensive use.
Also rose module is handling routing of frames much more efficiently.

This will considerably help us to focus on application programs now.
I am now concentrating my efforts on ROSE/FPAC and Linux FBB code 
adjustement.

Thanks to you all for your help.

73 de Bernard, f6bvp


View attachment "rose-patch-2.6.23.9" of type "text/plain" (4960 bytes)