From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeroen Vreeken Subject: Re: [RFC] Future of INP3 patch Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 23:13:37 +0100 Message-ID: <50D0EA91.30908@vreeken.net> References: <1355612939-3148455801.80b07a7cbd@bliksem.vehosting.nl> <4B30F8D4-7679-400F-8606-BC0D449DCA8D@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4B30F8D4-7679-400F-8606-BC0D449DCA8D@gmail.com> Sender: linux-hams-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Matt VK2RQ Cc: "linux-hams@vger.kernel.org" Hi Matt, On 12/16/2012 12:08 AM, Matt VK2RQ wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I haven't seen any replies after posting about the inp3 patches for 2.6 so >> either the spontanious combustion problems are fixed or nobody cares..... >> At the moment the patch seems to be pretty stable and running without >> problems so I was wondering what to do next: >> >> - Keep making new patches for the 2.6 kernels and try to get it in in 2.7 >> (Should be very safe, although less testing) >> >> - Try to get it in 2.6. >> (The patch only affects netrom and is for 99% configurable with >> CONFIG_NETROM_INP with the exeption of the netrom node sorting but this >> shouldn't be a problem) >> >> Any comments? > Hi Jeroen, > > I just tried installing version 007 of your INP3 patch to kernel 2.6.32. There have > been some changes to the kernel since 2.6.4, so I needed to tweak it a bit to > get it to compile: > http://qsl.net/vk2rq/2.6.32-inp3_007.patch > > However, there are some deadlock problems arising from this patch. Specifically, > when inp3_nodes_neg() is called, neigh_list will already be locked, and if > it was called from inp3_route_neg(), then node_list will be locked as well. > > However, inp3_nodes_neg() calls nr_del_node_found(), which assumes > there are no locks in place. If nr_del_node_found() places a call to > nr_remove_neigh() or nr_remove_node(), then those functions will > try to acquire a lock on neigh_list or node_list, which will lead to a > deadlock situation if those locks are already in place. > > This thread is already quite old, so not sure if you or anyone else is > still maintaining this code? I have not been actively maintaining the code. However I am currently re-building the local packet access point in Eindhoven, and I was planning on updating the patch to a more recent kernel. (probably 3.7 based) I haven't got around to this since I am still fighting with scc cards... but I hope to get to the netrom part soon. 73, Jeroen PE1RXQ