Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> =============================================
> [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> ---------------------------------------------
> java/3069 is trying to acquire lock:
> (slock-AF_INET6){-+..}, at: [<ffffffff804aa9df>] sk_clone+0xcc/0x341
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> (slock-AF_INET6){-+..}, at: [<ffffffff88169f10>] tcp_v6_rcv+0x2e9/0x799 [ipv6]
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
> 1 lock held by java/3069:
> #0: (slock-AF_INET6){-+..}, at: [<ffffffff88169f10>] tcp_v6_rcv+0x2e9/0x799
> [ipv6]
This is a known defect in the lock validator where it complains about
the nested locking in the TCP accept path. This is safe because the
second lock is on the newly created child TCP socket which does not
exist in any other context yet.
Cheers,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
