From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christophe Saout Subject: Re: [Fwd: [Bug 3003] New: might_sleep warning when setting up IPSec with IPCOMP] Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2004 23:35:59 +0200 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <1088804159.763.5.camel@leto.cs.pocnet.net> References: <40E5A1B3.2020202@us.ibm.com> <40E5D326.5000509@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-mH+Ux6i7NwWDf3I2Zdzn" Cc: James Morris , akpm@osdl.org, netdev , mjbligh@us.ibm.com Return-path: To: Nivedita Singhvi In-Reply-To: <40E5D326.5000509@us.ibm.com> Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org --=-mH+Ux6i7NwWDf3I2Zdzn Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Am Fr, den 02.07.2004 um 14:27 Uhr -0700 schrieb Nivedita Singhvi: > We are grabbing dst->xfrm lock in ipcomp_output(), > and have it held when we call ipcomp_compress(). >=20 > Is that the issue? I don't have the crypto module > code, but in_atomic() will be true. Yes. But the code might also be called from softirq context, when a packed from the NIC gets handled or when a slot in the queue becomes free. (I've also got warnings from those two cases in my logs) The compress/decompress calls should be able to be run from softirq (atomic) context just like encrypt/decrypt. I'm just wondering, why does deflate_compress call deflate_comp_init when it is called the first time, but deflate_init is a noop? Shouldn't the deflate_comp_init call just be moved to deflate_init? --=-mH+Ux6i7NwWDf3I2Zdzn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBA5dU/ZCYBcts5dM0RAvu+AJ9uPlqwuUTSSMKvhKJwdBqCrZGkcACeMPpJ y9HkduGM/pLuGamH56kM7KQ= =7Vct -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-mH+Ux6i7NwWDf3I2Zdzn--