From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Francois Romieu Subject: Re: 2.6.18-rc5 with GRE, iptables and Speedtouch ADSL, PPP over ATM Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2006 23:48:40 +0200 Message-ID: <20060902214839.GA27295@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com ([213.41.134.224]:61160 "EHLO fr.zoreil.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751634AbWIBVwC (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Sep 2006 17:52:02 -0400 To: Krzysztof Halasa Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Krzysztof Halasa : [...] > ======================================================= > [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ] > ------------------------------------------------------- > swapper/0 is trying to acquire lock: > (&dev->queue_lock){-+..}, at: [] dev_queue_xmit+0x56/0x290 > > but task is already holding lock: > (&dev->_xmit_lock){-+..}, at: [] dev_queue_xmit+0x224/0x290 > > which lock already depends on the new lock. > > > the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: > > -> #1 (&dev->_xmit_lock){-+..}: > [] lock_acquire+0x76/0xa0 > [] _spin_lock_bh+0x31/0x40 > [] dev_activate+0x69/0x120 [...] > [] vfs_ioctl+0x57/0x290 > [] sys_ioctl+0x39/0x60 > [] sysenter_past_esp+0x56/0x8d > > -> #0 (&dev->queue_lock){-+..}: > [] lock_acquire+0x76/0xa0 > [] _spin_lock+0x2c/0x40 > [] dev_queue_xmit+0x56/0x290 [...] > [] __do_softirq+0x55/0xc0 > [] do_softirq+0x63/0xd0 dev_activate takes BH disabling locks only. How could a softirq happen on the same cpu and trigger a deadlock ? -- Ueimor -- VGER BF report: U 0.500151