From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: Kernel WARNING: at net/core/dev.c:1330 __netif_schedule+0x2c/0x98() Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2008 00:01:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20080801.000146.246099981.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20080731.052932.110299354.davem@davemloft.net> <20080801064810.GA4435@ff.dom.local> <20080801070150.GB4435@ff.dom.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: johannes-cdvu00un1VgdHxzADdlk8Q@public.gmane.org, netdev-BkyiQQGWkgE@public.gmane.org, peterz-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org, Larry.Finger-tQ5ms3gMjBLk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org, kaber-dcUjhNyLwpNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org, torvalds-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-wireless-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, mingo-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org To: jarkao2-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080801070150.GB4435-8HppEYmqbBCE+EvaaNYduQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-wireless-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org From: Jarek Poplawski Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 07:01:50 +0000 > On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 06:48:10AM +0000, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 05:29:32AM -0700, David Miller wrote: > ... > > > diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c > > > index 63d6bcd..69320a5 100644 > > > --- a/net/core/dev.c > > > +++ b/net/core/dev.c > > > @@ -4200,6 +4200,7 @@ static void netdev_init_queues(struct net_device *dev) > > > { > > > netdev_init_one_queue(dev, &dev->rx_queue, NULL); > > > netdev_for_each_tx_queue(dev, netdev_init_one_queue, NULL); > > > + spin_lock_init(&dev->tx_global_lock); > > > > This will probably need some lockdep annotations similar to > > _xmit_lock. > > ...BTW, we probably could also consider some optimization here: the > xmit_lock of the first queue could be treated as special, and only > the owner could do such a freezing. This would save changes of > functionality to non mq devices. On the other hand, it would need > remembering about this special treatment (so, eg. a separate lockdep > initialization than all the others). I think special casing the zero's queue's lock is a bad idea. Having a real top-level synchronizer is a powerful tool and we could use it for other things. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html