netdev - Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 18492] New: kernel softirq warning on boot

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: <20100914.141103.123996613.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:11:03 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:	hramrach@...trum.cz, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	bugzilla-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org,
	bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org, herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au
Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 18492] New: kernel softirq warning on boot

From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 13:57:30 -0700

> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 22:45:19 +0200
> Michal Suchanek <hramrach@...trum.cz> wrote:
> 
>> > rcu_read_unlock_bh() in netpoll_rx(), added by "netpoll: Fix RCU
>> > usage".
>> 
>> Do you mean de85d99eb7b595f6751550184b94c1e2f74a828b?
> 
> yup.
> 
>> I am not sure reverting just that would work, nor that the kernel
>> around that point is in shape for trying on a system I would want to
>> still use. It's way back in history for a kernel which is just to be
>> released.
> 
> No, we wouldn't want to revert it - it fixes stuff.
> 
> It could be that we just don't need the _bh locking, if local irqs are
> reliably disabled.  But I didn't really look.

I'll take a closer look at this if Herbert doesn't beat me to it.
--
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