* David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The lockdep fixes are starting to cause us to go in and start adding
> hard IRQ protection to many socket layer objects and I want this
> thinking to end quickly :)
In earlier lockdep versions we had many such hacks, but in the current
upstream kern
Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Act 1
>
> Enter the mpi_start_xmit() function, which is airo's xmit function.
> This function takes the aux_lock first, with irq's off, then calls
> skb_queue_tail(). skb_queue_tail takes the sk_receive_queue.lock (with
> irqsave as well).
Nope, ma
On Fri, 2006-07-07 at 12:09 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2006 20:13:09 +0200
>
> > Now a question for netdev: what is the interrupt-or-softirq rules for
> > the sk_receive_queue.lock?
> >
> > Anyway, the patch below fixes this deadloc
From: Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2006 20:13:09 +0200
> Now a question for netdev: what is the interrupt-or-softirq rules for
> the sk_receive_queue.lock?
>
> Anyway, the patch below fixes this deadlock; it may or may not be the
> correct solution depending on the netde
On Fri, 2006-07-07 at 13:19 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> Another one triggered by a Fedora-development user..
>
> e100: eth1: e100_watchdog: link up, 100Mbps, half-duplex
>
> =
> [ INFO: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected ]
>
