On Fri, 8 Dec 2006 08:06:57 +1100
Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 09:55:22PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > fallout of the recent big networking merge i guess. Tested fix below. 
> > David, Herbert, do you agree with it, or is it a false positive?
> 
> I agree that this is a bug, but the fix is in the wrong spot.  The
> dev_watchdog function already runs in softirq context so it doesn't
> need to disable BH.
> 
> You can almost be guaranteed that if netpoll is involved in a bug
> then it should be fixed :)
> 
> In this case, it's taking the tx lock in process context which is
> not allowed.  So it should disable BH before taking the tx lock.
> 

Like this?

        /* don't get messages out of order, and no recursion */
        if (skb_queue_len(&npinfo->txq) == 0 &&
                    npinfo->poll_owner != smp_processor_id()) {
                local_bh_disable();     /* Where's netif_tx_trylock_bh()? */
                if (netif_tx_trylock(dev)) {
                        /* try until next clock tick */
                        for (tries = jiffies_to_usecs(1)/USEC_PER_POLL;
                                        tries > 0; --tries) {
                                if (!netif_queue_stopped(dev))
                                        status = dev->hard_start_xmit(skb, dev);

                                if (status == NETDEV_TX_OK)
                                        break;

                                /* tickle device maybe there is some cleanup */
                                netpoll_poll(np);

                                udelay(USEC_PER_POLL);
                        }
                        netif_tx_unlock(dev);
                }
                local_bh_enable();
        }


--- a/net/core/netpoll.c~netpoll-locking-fix
+++ a/net/core/netpoll.c
@@ -242,22 +242,26 @@ static void netpoll_send_skb(struct netp
 
        /* don't get messages out of order, and no recursion */
        if (skb_queue_len(&npinfo->txq) == 0 &&
-           npinfo->poll_owner != smp_processor_id() &&
-           netif_tx_trylock(dev)) {
-               /* try until next clock tick */
-               for (tries = jiffies_to_usecs(1)/USEC_PER_POLL; tries > 0; 
--tries) {
-                       if (!netif_queue_stopped(dev))
-                               status = dev->hard_start_xmit(skb, dev);
+                   npinfo->poll_owner != smp_processor_id()) {
+               local_bh_disable();     /* Where's netif_tx_trylock_bh()? */
+               if (netif_tx_trylock(dev)) {
+                       /* try until next clock tick */
+                       for (tries = jiffies_to_usecs(1)/USEC_PER_POLL;
+                                       tries > 0; --tries) {
+                               if (!netif_queue_stopped(dev))
+                                       status = dev->hard_start_xmit(skb, dev);
 
-                       if (status == NETDEV_TX_OK)
-                               break;
+                               if (status == NETDEV_TX_OK)
+                                       break;
 
-                       /* tickle device maybe there is some cleanup */
-                       netpoll_poll(np);
+                               /* tickle device maybe there is some cleanup */
+                               netpoll_poll(np);
 
-                       udelay(USEC_PER_POLL);
+                               udelay(USEC_PER_POLL);
+                       }
+                       netif_tx_unlock(dev);
                }
-               netif_tx_unlock(dev);
+               local_bh_enable();
        }
 
        if (status != NETDEV_TX_OK) {
_

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to