From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
To: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
Cc: mchan@broadcom.com, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: UDP/bnx2: inconsistent lock state (Re: linux-next: Tree for October 30)
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 14:22:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4909B516.30406@cosmosbay.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a4423d670810300559hed082b8uf1f7ce05f5a6f4af@mail.gmail.com>
Alexander Beregalov a écrit :
> 2008/10/30 Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>:
>> bnx2 0000:03:00.0: irq 38 for MSI/MSI-X
>> bnx2: eth0: using MSI
>> bnx2: eth0 NIC Copper Link is Up, 1000 Mbps full duplex, receive &
>> transmit flow control ON
>>
>> [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
>> 2.6.28-rc2-next-20081030 #4
>> ---------------------------------
>> inconsistent {softirq-on-W} -> {in-softirq-W} usage.
>> swapper/0 [HC0[0]:SC1[1]:HE1:SE0] takes:
>> (&table->hash[i].lock){-+..}, at: [<ffffffff804ea8c5>]
>> __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
>> {softirq-on-W} state was registered at:
>> [<ffffffff80257ea0>] __lock_acquire+0x2fd/0xc72
>> [<ffffffff8025889a>] lock_acquire+0x85/0xa9
>> [<ffffffff80525527>] _spin_lock+0x3c/0x70
>> [<ffffffff804eaca2>] udp_lib_unhash+0x2b/0x90
>> [<ffffffff804ab315>] sk_common_release+0x2f/0x83
>> [<ffffffff804e9631>] udp_lib_close+0x9/0xb
>> [<ffffffff804f1274>] inet_release+0x58/0x5f
>> [<ffffffff804a889e>] sock_release+0x20/0xc1
>> [<ffffffff804a8973>] sock_close+0x34/0x3a
>> [<ffffffff8029e8ee>] __fput+0xc5/0x164
>> [<ffffffff8029e9a2>] fput+0x15/0x17
>> [<ffffffff8029be90>] filp_close+0x67/0x72
>> [<ffffffff8023864a>] put_files_struct+0x74/0xc8
>> [<ffffffff802386e5>] exit_files+0x47/0x4f
>> [<ffffffff80239f28>] do_exit+0x27a/0x8b7
>> [<ffffffff8023a5e4>] do_group_exit+0x7f/0xaf
>> [<ffffffff8023a626>] sys_exit_group+0x12/0x14
>> [<ffffffff8020b6fb>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>> [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
>> irq event stamp: 56806
>> hardirqs last enabled at (56806): [<ffffffff8023bf15>]
>> _local_bh_enable_ip+0xba/0xe3
>> hardirqs last disabled at (56805): [<ffffffff8023beaf>]
>> _local_bh_enable_ip+0x54/0xe3
>> softirqs last enabled at (56786): [<ffffffff8023c0ec>] __do_softirq+0xf8/0x104
>> softirqs last disabled at (56791): [<ffffffff8020cbac>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x28
>>
>> other info that might help us debug this:
>> no locks held by swapper/0.
>>
>> stack backtrace:
>> Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.28-rc2-next-20081030 #4
>> Call Trace:
>> <IRQ> [<ffffffff80256a9c>] valid_state+0x179/0x18c
>> [<ffffffff80256fda>] mark_lock+0x14d/0x37a
>> [<ffffffff80257e25>] __lock_acquire+0x282/0xc72
>> [<ffffffff804c9a91>] ? rt_intern_hash+0x442/0x45c
>> [<ffffffff8023bf47>] ? local_bh_enable_ip+0x9/0xb
>> [<ffffffff8025889a>] lock_acquire+0x85/0xa9
>> [<ffffffff804ea8c5>] ? __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
>> [<ffffffff80525527>] _spin_lock+0x3c/0x70
>> [<ffffffff804ea8c5>] ? __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
>> [<ffffffff804ea8c5>] __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
>> [<ffffffff804eac75>] udp_rcv+0x15/0x17
>> [<ffffffff804cc1ec>] ip_local_deliver+0xad/0x13d
>> [<ffffffff804cc107>] ip_rcv+0x4b7/0x4ef
>> [<ffffffff804b3efb>] netif_receive_skb+0x213/0x23a
>> [<ffffffff8042fa7c>] bnx2_poll_work+0x92e/0xaa5
>> [<ffffffff8024f935>] ? getnstimeofday+0x3a/0x96
>> [<ffffffff8025011e>] ? do_settimeofday+0x7f/0x131
>> [<ffffffff8025001e>] ? update_wall_time+0x38e/0x40f
>> [<ffffffff80256ea9>] ? mark_lock+0x1c/0x37a
>> [<ffffffff802694f4>] ? __rcu_read_lock+0xa0/0xaf
>> [<ffffffff8042fe41>] bnx2_poll+0x128/0x20d
>> [<ffffffff804b2935>] net_rx_action+0xd2/0x1f4
>> [<ffffffff8023c064>] __do_softirq+0x70/0x104
>> [<ffffffff8020cbac>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x28
>> [<ffffffff8020e1d5>] do_softirq+0x39/0x8a
>> [<ffffffff8023bc89>] irq_exit+0x45/0xa2
>> [<ffffffff8020e4e6>] do_IRQ+0x16a/0x19c
>> [<ffffffff8020bc8b>] ret_from_intr+0x0/0xf
>> <EOI> [<ffffffff80212d69>] ? mwait_idle+0x3e/0x48
>> [<ffffffff80212d60>] ? mwait_idle+0x35/0x48
>> [<ffffffff8020a8db>] ? cpu_idle+0x59/0xc2
>> [<ffffffff8051feb4>] ? start_secondary+0x263/0x26b
>>
>
> Similar issue on sparc/sunhme
>
>
Yes, its a generic problem, I replied to your previous mail with a proper fix
Thank you
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-30 13:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-30 10:40 UDP/bnx2: inconsistent lock state (Re: linux-next: Tree for October 30) Alexander Beregalov
2008-10-30 12:59 ` Alexander Beregalov
2008-10-30 13:22 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2008-10-30 13:21 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-10-30 21:01 ` UDP/bnx2: inconsistent lock state David Miller
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=4909B516.30406@cosmosbay.com \
--to=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=a.beregalov@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mchan@broadcom.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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.