[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4CE36F9E.4070508@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 22:01:02 -0800
From: John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC: "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"therbert@...gle.com" <therbert@...gle.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [net-2.6 PATCH v2] net: zero kobject in rx_queue_release
On 11/16/2010 9:51 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le mardi 16 novembre 2010 à 21:42 -0800, John Fastabend a écrit :
>> netif_set_real_num_rx_queues() can decrement and increment
>> the number of rx queues. For example ixgbe does this as
>> features and offloads are toggled. Presumably this could
>> also happen across down/up on most devices if the available
>> resources changed (cpu offlined).
>>
>> The kobject needs to be zero'd in this case so that the
>> state is not preserved across kobject_put()/kobject_init_and_add().
>>
>> This resolves the following error report.
>>
>> ixgbe 0000:03:00.0: eth2: NIC Link is Up 10 Gbps, Flow Control: RX/TX
>> kobject (ffff880324b83210): tried to init an initialized object, something is seriously wrong.
>> Pid: 1972, comm: lldpad Not tainted 2.6.37-rc18021qaz+ #169
>> Call Trace:
>> [<ffffffff8121c940>] kobject_init+0x3a/0x83
>> [<ffffffff8121cf77>] kobject_init_and_add+0x23/0x57
>> [<ffffffff8107b800>] ? mark_lock+0x21/0x267
>> [<ffffffff813c6d11>] net_rx_queue_update_kobjects+0x63/0xc6
>> [<ffffffff813b5e0e>] netif_set_real_num_rx_queues+0x5f/0x78
>> [<ffffffffa0261d49>] ixgbe_set_num_queues+0x1c6/0x1ca [ixgbe]
>> [<ffffffffa0262509>] ixgbe_init_interrupt_scheme+0x1e/0x79c [ixgbe]
>> [<ffffffffa0274596>] ixgbe_dcbnl_set_state+0x167/0x189 [ixgbe]
>>
>> Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>
>> ---
>
> I am not sure why you resent it, anyway, I ack it
>
> Acked-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
>
> Thanks
>
>
net-next has Tom's changes for queue allocation and freeing. So the net-2.6 patch and net-next-2.6 patches are slightly different. I wanted to get the RCU_INIT_POINTER update in both and thought it would be easiest for Dave if they applied cleanly on both tree's. Let me know if there is a better way to indicate that here I just used the prefix net and net-next.
Thanks,
John.
--
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