[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1469684635.9389.4.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 07:43:55 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Cc: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Satyam Sharma <satyam@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org,
Ye Xiaolong <xiaolong.ye@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [e1000_netpoll] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid
context at kernel/irq/manage.c:110
On Wed, 2016-07-27 at 14:38 -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-07-26 at 11:14 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > Could you try this ?
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_main.c
> > b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_main.c
> > index
> > f42129d09e2c23ba9fdb5cde890d50ecb7166a42..a53c41c4c4f7d1fe52f95a2cab8784a
> > 938b3820b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_main.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_main.c
> > @@ -5257,9 +5257,13 @@ static void e1000_netpoll(struct net_device
> > *netdev)
> > {
> > struct e1000_adapter *adapter = netdev_priv(netdev);
> >
> > - disable_irq(adapter->pdev->irq);
> > - e1000_intr(adapter->pdev->irq, netdev);
> > - enable_irq(adapter->pdev->irq);
> > + if (napi_schedule_prep(&adapter->napi)) {
> > + adapter->total_tx_bytes = 0;
> > + adapter->total_tx_packets = 0;
> > + adapter->total_rx_bytes = 0;
> > + adapter->total_rx_packets = 0;
> > + __napi_schedule(&adapter->napi);
> > + }
> > }
> > #endif
> >
>
> Since this fixes the issue Fengguang saw, will you be submitting a formal
> patch Eric? (please) I can get this queued up for Dave's net tree as soon
> as I receive the formal patch.
I would prefer having a definitive advice from Thomas Gleixner and/or
others if disable_irq() is forbidden from IRQ path.
As I said, about all netpoll() methods in net drivers use disable_irq()
so a lot of patches would be needed.
disable_irq() should then test this condition earlier, so that we can
detect potential bug, even if the IRQ is not (yet) threaded.
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists