[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090731125654.GB18303@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 08:56:54 -0400
From: Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Matt Carlson <mcarlson@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: netpoll + xmit_lock == deadlock
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 09:30:17AM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 09:06:39PM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> >
> > but nothing in that path takes the xmit_lock. The poll_lock is taken in that
> > patch, but thats for recieve_side syncronization, not transmit side. Nothing in
> > the tg3 driver (to use your example), that I can see takes the xmit_lock in the
> > rx path either, so I'm not really sure where you comming from here.
>
> tg3_poll => tg3_poll_work => tg3_tx => netif_tx_lock
Oh, goodness, thats just asking for disaster. Setting asside the netpoll issue
for the moment, what if we take an rx interrupt on a cpu while in the middle of
sending a frame? Whats to stop the NET_RX_SOFTIRQ after the hard interrupt and
recursively taking the _xmit_lock? With or without netpoll, that seems prone to
deadlock.
Neil
> --
> 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