From: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
To: Krishna Kumar <kumarkr@us.ibm.com>, scott.feldman@intel.com
Cc: reuben-linux@reub.net, akpm@osdl.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Kernel crash in 2.6.0-test9-mm3
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 18:24:42 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031118182442.7e9ea7e9.davem@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OF0696EDA9.D66EB77E-ON88256DE3.0009C15A@us.ibm.com>
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 18:22:42 -0800
Krishna Kumar <kumarkr@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Could this be happening on an SMP system only ? If so, e100intr routine
> services tx queues (e100_tx_srv) without holding a lock.
[ Scott we have a bug report, and we're trying to determine if the
cause is that the e100 driver frees a TX SKB multiple times due
to some race or other problem in current 2.6.x ]
That's a very good point, and I looked a bit in this area.
When e100intr() is doing it's work, it disables and clears
the interrupt, only after doing RX and TX processing does
it reenable chip interrupts via e100_set_intr_mask().
That is my analysis of the situation.
However, with things like IOAPIC and such, it might be possible
for two cpus to enter e100intr() simultaneously, both read
the same status, both see that the interrupt is pending, and
both thus process the interrupt and race with each other.
Scott, what prevents the above from happening?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-11-19 2:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-11-19 2:22 Kernel crash in 2.6.0-test9-mm3 Krishna Kumar
2003-11-19 2:24 ` David S. Miller [this message]
2003-11-19 2:58 ` Reuben Farrelly
[not found] ` <20031119185157.3edf69c8.davem@redhat.com>
2003-11-20 3:05 ` Reuben Farrelly
[not found] ` <20031119190258.4d926957.davem@redhat.com>
2003-11-20 7:30 ` Reuben Farrelly
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-11-20 2:40 Feldman, Scott
2003-11-23 20:29 ` Rask Ingemann Lambertsen
[not found] <6.0.1.1.2.20031118232152.01ae5728@tornado.reub.net>
2003-11-18 19:01 ` Andrew Morton
2003-11-18 22:22 ` David S. Miller
2003-11-19 0:49 ` David S. Miller
2003-11-19 1:22 ` Reuben Farrelly
2003-11-19 2:02 ` Andrew Morton
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=20031118182442.7e9ea7e9.davem@redhat.com \
--to=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=kumarkr@us.ibm.com \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=reuben-linux@reub.net \
--cc=scott.feldman@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).