From: Cong Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
To: Flavio Leitner <fbl@sysclose.org>
Cc: bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, nhorman@tuxdriver.com,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, mpm@selenic.com, fubar@us.ibm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
bonding-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, jmoyer@redhat.com,
gospo@redhat.com, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [Bridge] [PATCH] netconsole: queue console messages to send later
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 16:59:49 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C0E0685.9040908@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100608003707.GA30604@sysclose.org>
Thanks for your fix, Flavio!
On 06/08/10 08:37, Flavio Leitner wrote:
>> There may not be another timer or workqueue able to execute after the
>> printk() we're trying to emit. We may never get to that point.
>
> What if in the netpoll, before we push the skb to the driver, we check
> for a bit saying that it's already pushing another skb. In this case,
> queue the new skb inside of netpoll and soon as the first call returns
> and try to clear the bit, it will send the next skb?
>
> printk("message 1")
> ...
> netconsole called
> netpoll sets the flag bit
> pushes to the bonding driver which does another printk("message 2")
> netconsole called again
> netpoll checks for the flag, queue the message, returns.
> so, bonding can finish up to send the first message
> netpoll is about to return, checks for new queued messages, and pushes them.
> bonding finishes up to send the second message
> ....
>
> No deadlocks, skbs are ordered and still under the same opportunity
> to send something. Does it sound acceptable?
> It's off the top of my head, so probably this idea has some problems.
>
I am not a net expert, I am not sure if this solution really addresses
David's concern, but it makes sense for me.
>
>> Fix the locking in the drivers or layers that cause the issue instead
>> of breaking netconsole.
>
> Someday, somewhere, I know because I did this before, someone will
> use a debugging printk() and will see the entire box hanging with
> absolutely no message in any console because of this problem.
> I'm not saying that fixing driver isn't the right way to go but
> it seems not enough to me.
Well, I think netconsole is not alone, other console drivers could
have the same problem, printk() is not always available in some
situation like this.
Thanks.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Cong Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
To: Flavio Leitner <fbl@sysclose.org>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, fubar@us.ibm.com, mpm@selenic.com,
gospo@redhat.com, nhorman@tuxdriver.com, jmoyer@redhat.com,
shemminger@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org,
bonding-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] netconsole: queue console messages to send later
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 16:59:49 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C0E0685.9040908@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100608003707.GA30604@sysclose.org>
Thanks for your fix, Flavio!
On 06/08/10 08:37, Flavio Leitner wrote:
>> There may not be another timer or workqueue able to execute after the
>> printk() we're trying to emit. We may never get to that point.
>
> What if in the netpoll, before we push the skb to the driver, we check
> for a bit saying that it's already pushing another skb. In this case,
> queue the new skb inside of netpoll and soon as the first call returns
> and try to clear the bit, it will send the next skb?
>
> printk("message 1")
> ...
> netconsole called
> netpoll sets the flag bit
> pushes to the bonding driver which does another printk("message 2")
> netconsole called again
> netpoll checks for the flag, queue the message, returns.
> so, bonding can finish up to send the first message
> netpoll is about to return, checks for new queued messages, and pushes them.
> bonding finishes up to send the second message
> ....
>
> No deadlocks, skbs are ordered and still under the same opportunity
> to send something. Does it sound acceptable?
> It's off the top of my head, so probably this idea has some problems.
>
I am not a net expert, I am not sure if this solution really addresses
David's concern, but it makes sense for me.
>
>> Fix the locking in the drivers or layers that cause the issue instead
>> of breaking netconsole.
>
> Someday, somewhere, I know because I did this before, someone will
> use a debugging printk() and will see the entire box hanging with
> absolutely no message in any console because of this problem.
> I'm not saying that fixing driver isn't the right way to go but
> it seems not enough to me.
Well, I think netconsole is not alone, other console drivers could
have the same problem, printk() is not always available in some
situation like this.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-08 8:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 73+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-05 8:11 [Bridge] [v5 Patch 1/3] netpoll: add generic support for bridge and bonding devices Amerigo Wang
2010-05-05 8:11 ` Amerigo Wang
2010-05-05 8:11 ` Amerigo Wang
2010-05-05 8:11 ` [Bridge] [v5 Patch 2/3] bridge: make bridge support netpoll Amerigo Wang
2010-05-05 8:11 ` Amerigo Wang
2010-05-05 8:11 ` Amerigo Wang
2010-05-05 8:11 ` [Bridge] [v5 Patch 3/3] bonding: make bonding " Amerigo Wang
2010-05-05 8:11 ` Amerigo Wang
2010-05-05 8:11 ` Amerigo Wang
2010-05-06 2:05 ` [Bridge] [v5 Patch 1/3] netpoll: add generic support for bridge and bonding devices Matt Mackall
2010-05-06 2:05 ` Matt Mackall
2010-05-06 7:44 ` [Bridge] " David Miller
2010-05-06 7:44 ` David Miller
2010-05-07 3:24 ` [Bridge] " Cong Wang
2010-05-07 3:24 ` Cong Wang
2010-05-27 18:05 ` [Bridge] " Flavio Leitner
2010-05-27 18:05 ` Flavio Leitner
2010-05-27 20:35 ` [Bridge] " David Miller
2010-05-27 20:35 ` David Miller
2010-05-27 21:25 ` [Bridge] " Flavio Leitner
2010-05-27 21:25 ` Flavio Leitner
2010-05-28 2:47 ` [Bridge] " Cong Wang
2010-05-28 2:47 ` Cong Wang
2010-05-28 19:40 ` [Bridge] " Flavio Leitner
2010-05-28 19:40 ` Flavio Leitner
2010-05-31 5:56 ` [Bridge] " Cong Wang
2010-05-31 5:56 ` Cong Wang
2010-05-31 19:08 ` [Bridge] " Flavio Leitner
2010-05-31 19:08 ` Flavio Leitner
2010-06-01 9:57 ` [Bridge] " Cong Wang
2010-06-01 9:57 ` Cong Wang
2010-06-01 18:42 ` [Bridge] " Jay Vosburgh
2010-06-01 18:42 ` Jay Vosburgh
2010-06-02 10:04 ` [Bridge] " Cong Wang
2010-06-02 10:04 ` Cong Wang
2010-06-04 19:18 ` [Bridge] " Andy Gospodarek
2010-06-04 19:18 ` Andy Gospodarek
2010-06-07 9:57 ` [Bridge] " Cong Wang
2010-06-07 9:57 ` Cong Wang
2010-06-07 10:01 ` [Bridge] " David Miller
2010-06-07 10:01 ` David Miller
2010-06-08 8:36 ` [Bridge] " Cong Wang
2010-06-08 8:36 ` Cong Wang
2010-06-07 13:03 ` [Bridge] " Andy Gospodarek
2010-06-07 13:03 ` Andy Gospodarek
2010-06-08 8:38 ` [Bridge] " Cong Wang
2010-06-08 8:38 ` Cong Wang
2010-06-07 19:24 ` [Bridge] [PATCH] netconsole: queue console messages to send later Flavio Leitner
2010-06-07 19:24 ` Flavio Leitner
2010-06-07 19:50 ` [Bridge] " Matt Mackall
2010-06-07 19:50 ` Matt Mackall
2010-06-07 20:00 ` [Bridge] " Stephen Hemminger
2010-06-07 20:00 ` Stephen Hemminger
2010-06-07 20:21 ` [Bridge] " Matt Mackall
2010-06-07 20:21 ` Matt Mackall
2010-06-07 23:52 ` [Bridge] " David Miller
2010-06-07 23:52 ` David Miller
2010-06-07 23:50 ` [Bridge] " David Miller
2010-06-07 23:50 ` David Miller
2010-06-08 0:37 ` [Bridge] " Flavio Leitner
2010-06-08 0:37 ` Flavio Leitner
2010-06-08 8:59 ` Cong Wang [this message]
2010-06-08 8:59 ` Cong Wang
2010-05-28 8:16 ` [Bridge] [v5 Patch 1/3] netpoll: add generic support for bridge and bonding devices Cong Wang
2010-05-28 8:16 ` Cong Wang
2010-05-28 20:42 ` [Bridge] " Flavio Leitner
2010-05-28 20:42 ` Flavio Leitner
2010-05-28 21:03 ` [Bridge] " Jay Vosburgh
2010-05-28 21:03 ` Jay Vosburgh
2010-05-31 5:29 ` [Bridge] " Cong Wang
2010-05-31 5:29 ` Cong Wang
2010-05-31 5:37 ` [Bridge] " Cong Wang
2010-05-31 5:37 ` Cong Wang
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=4C0E0685.9040908@redhat.com \
--to=amwang@redhat.com \
--cc=bonding-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=fbl@sysclose.org \
--cc=fubar@us.ibm.com \
--cc=gospo@redhat.com \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.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.