From: Kenzo Iwami <k-iwami@cj.jp.nec.com>
To: Kenzo Iwami <k-iwami@cj.jp.nec.com>
Cc: "Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
"Kok, Auke-jan H" <auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com>,
Shaw Vrana <shaw@vranix.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, "Ronciak, John" <john.ronciak@intel.com>
Subject: Re: watchdog timeout panic in e1000 driver
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2006 18:14:37 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4573E6FD.3030905@cj.jp.nec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4562D207.60301@cj.jp.nec.com>
Hi,
>> Doesn't this just mean that we need a spinlock or some other kind of
>> semaphore around acquiring, using, and releasing this resource? We keep
>> going around and around about this but I'm pretty sure spinlocks are
>> meant to be able to solve exactly this issue.
>>
>> The problem is going to get considerably more nasty if we need to hold a
>> spinlock with interrupts disabled for a significant amount of time, at
>> which point a semaphore of some kind with a spinlock around it would
>> seem to be more useful.
>
> Even if spin_lock() was used to protect this resource, it is still possible
> for an interrupt to kick in and call e1000_watchdog. In this case,
> e1000_get_software_semaphore() will be called from within the interrupt
> handler and the problem will still occur.
>
> In order to solve this problem, interrupt should be disabled (for example,
> spin_lock_irqsave).
> The interrupt handler can't run while the process is holding this resource,
> and this problem doesn't occur.
>
>> I'll work with Auke to see if we can come up with another try.
>
> Do you have any updates about your test code?
Does the fix I previously proposed have problems?
If it does, I'd like to help find investigate another fix to solve
this problem.
--
Kenzo Iwami (k-iwami@cj.jp.nec.com)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-12-04 9:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-11-16 17:20 watchdog timeout panic in e1000 driver Brandeburg, Jesse
2006-11-21 10:16 ` Kenzo Iwami
2006-12-04 9:14 ` Kenzo Iwami [this message]
2006-12-05 0:46 ` Auke Kok
2006-12-12 7:58 ` Kenzo Iwami
2006-12-19 0:13 ` Kenzo Iwami
2007-01-15 9:12 ` Kenzo Iwami
2007-01-15 16:14 ` Auke Kok
2007-01-16 8:42 ` Kenzo Iwami
2007-01-18 9:22 ` Kenzo Iwami
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-10-19 10:19 Kenzo Iwami
2006-10-19 15:39 ` Auke Kok
[not found] ` <4538BFF2.2040207@cj.jp.nec.com>
2006-10-20 15:51 ` Auke Kok
2006-10-24 9:01 ` Kenzo Iwami
2006-10-24 16:15 ` Auke Kok
2006-10-25 13:41 ` Kenzo Iwami
2006-10-25 15:09 ` Auke Kok
2006-10-26 10:35 ` Kenzo Iwami
2006-10-26 14:34 ` Auke Kok
2006-10-30 11:36 ` Kenzo Iwami
2006-10-30 17:30 ` Auke Kok
2006-10-31 3:22 ` Shaw Vrana
2006-11-01 13:21 ` Kenzo Iwami
2006-11-15 10:33 ` Kenzo Iwami
2006-11-15 16:11 ` Auke Kok
2006-11-16 9:23 ` Kenzo Iwami
2007-02-20 9:26 ` Kenzo Iwami
2007-02-20 16:10 ` Auke Kok
2007-02-21 5:17 ` Kenzo Iwami
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4573E6FD.3030905@cj.jp.nec.com \
--to=k-iwami@cj.jp.nec.com \
--cc=auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=john.ronciak@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shaw@vranix.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.