From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@o2.pl>
Subject: Re: BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#0!  (2.6.18.2 plus hacks)
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 10:23:55 +0100
Message-ID: <20070102092355.GA2448@ff.dom.local>
References: <45889C53.8000307@candelatech.com> <4599E6D5.6050207@candelatech.com> <20070102073909.GA1712@ff.dom.local> <20070102082302.GB1712@ff.dom.local>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: NetDev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx10.go2.pl ([193.17.41.74]:55924 "EHLO poczta.o2.pl"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S932186AbXABJWT (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 2 Jan 2007 04:22:19 -0500
To: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20070102082302.GB1712@ff.dom.local>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 09:23:02AM +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 08:39:09AM +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> ...
> > The main thing is the possibility of processing
> > skb with not entirely open source dev which isn't
> > expected (and checked) by receive functions.
> > I think the easiest way to convince yourself is
> > to add temporarily IFF_UP flag checking with
> > dropping at the beginning of netif_receive_skb and
> > __vlan_hwaccel_rx.

... and vlan_skb_recv also.

Jarek P.