From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jack Wang Subject: Re: list corruption in IPOIB Date: Sat, 18 May 2013 23:36:07 +0200 Message-ID: <5197F447.5020702@profitbricks.com> References: <519686B4.7010300@profitbricks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Or Gerlitz Cc: Shlomo Pongratz , Or Gerlitz , "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Dongsu Park List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 2013=E5=B9=B405=E6=9C=8818=E6=97=A5 21:37, Or Gerlitz wrote: > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Jack Wang wrote: >> We've seen below neigh->list list corruption warning during testing, >=20 > So about little heads up on what kernel you are using? what's the way > to trigger this warning? Hi Or, I tried 3.4.23, and mainline kernel from Roland's rdma-for-linus, we added bug injection interface, run multithread iperf, and switched ib mode between connected and datagram in sync on each side as Shlomo suggested. >=20 >> From Dongsu's and my opinion, several place also need >> netif_tx_lock(_bh)/netif_tx_unlock(_bh) pairs around neigh->list , I >> tried to add netif_tx_lock/netif_tx_unlock into ipoib_cm_destroy_tx,= it >> improved the situation, there're some other places in ipoib_main.c a= nd >> ipoib_mcast.c, but I don't know which lock should be added, if you c= an >> take some time to look into it, that will be great. >=20 >=20 > what do you mean by improved the situation? the waring is gone? and i= f > yes, what's remain? >=20 I mean it take longer time to reproduce this warning. Regards Jack > Or. >=20 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" i= n the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html