From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "David S. Miller" Subject: Re: possible bug in net/core/pktgen.c (2.6.10 kernel) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 12:41:00 -0800 Message-ID: <20050118124100.17b7f47a.davem@davemloft.net> References: <200501141129.21461.dsp@llnl.gov> <16874.25146.335366.990655@robur.slu.se> <200501180935.25419.dsp@llnl.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Robert.Olsson@data.slu.se, robert.olsson@its.uu.se, netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: Dave Peterson In-Reply-To: <200501180935.25419.dsp@llnl.gov> Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:35:25 -0800 Dave Peterson wrote: > On Sunday 16 January 2005 04:46 am, Robert Olsson wrote: > > Dave Peterson writes: > > > I found a piece of code that looks problematic in the 2.6.10 kernel. > > > The following code appears starting on line 746 in function inject() > > > of net/core/pktgen.c: > > > schedule(); > > > else > > > do_softirq(); > > > > Thanks! > > So it should be? > > Cool! Looks like a fix to me. I'm still a little bit confused on this one. Since when does do_softirq() need preemption disabled around calls to it? do_softirq() disabled hard IRQs during the duration of it's execution, thus effectively disabling preemption. What is the problematic case again?