From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A27B22877D8; Wed, 18 Feb 2026 07:30:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771399840; cv=none; b=m5dn2imczrJhO2gL4I42j7Q1mmjX0MfflnPlGHaVTOwq3rzrc95UY4vb4O8mpdmdBUmQvXYYje5jDloxKf/2ZwH31sd+8FsJV7ZcMREnMMn29Fgg11jAsqySiUuDe+oS50XLlosuucDWOS5L1V4qaTgRvGiwwlnSSIroQGo/ah0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771399840; c=relaxed/simple; bh=34u/rNF/6gMuqw/QVlKw+Hkw0ctFME7G9F/5KqB8LsQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=g1GrXJsQ/zOXQd54gAeaP7qre1Aa5SS6nCIsQaQVasgOeEnI0w6aw/3W4LuLCZbRO7xnCzvUQbTG4ge0CUW4KUTLRDuRxiH3WdmWU7cBcfZK/LoHjS6Kyg/cNRw9Vk9tO9ZOk67Go/75JLfLSyvTtYaSUHzUyNqIkcrWPSn94tc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=frHsimN5; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=s2N4jDFl; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="frHsimN5"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="s2N4jDFl" Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2026 08:30:36 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1771399838; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=rE1+nS47WTm1MywF1MSM8NtXNvVjaIpkgpgBHi8uZLw=; b=frHsimN5f0WFkWdQz/69DQuAw9hk38yo+1V4Z4MJ/8gpB4qm+/hye4N71URiIQfEINN5Y6 E6COlf+uIVwSKmZD1GpLFDmb2Y+Kx05zaDhdTkQv+0Wr06dAZqyIcpwR6ow+tue62CBkAK SsuRo77Ppkv5suj8XiJFSs2IOOFnbxwcaIfxXhoQZ5bLucWclIkF6PlpKWu0g3rlYomoKi XOTISplYcOelNq6JLX9O7039ml3irE5LhptQ/55YzeBLKpW7UACrsc0FYZr1EHKashXBr7 9Z8f2yGKCpOPEJVwkP1POBX4JZ6FGdWqB7tWy7IB9WiWEZCBBub1WCC/mqAN5Q== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1771399838; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=rE1+nS47WTm1MywF1MSM8NtXNvVjaIpkgpgBHi8uZLw=; b=s2N4jDFl/I3362WXwp8T+mzBytfrQXnRjYmii6jBZk1HHGQB2uSMExzRTHMePdUXeCOVMY cb8Tn3tHtRrIghCQ== From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior To: Bert Karwatzki Cc: Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev, Jakub Kicinski , Eric Dumazet , netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: "Dead loop on virtual device" error without softirq-BKL on PREEMPT_RT Message-ID: <20260218073036.AlkNRoAP@linutronix.de> References: <6274de932f4a62c51b424b65fc875ef3cb5ffd60.camel@web.de> <20260216153745.CA3__zRc@linutronix.de> <37d6e27f96afb57c5716798530cb3560d25202e5.camel@web.de> <20260217071952.WCXLGs5-@linutronix.de> <80114792206dc00d0099f00999a209e717debb12.camel@web.de> <20260217095700.SjYjM8RO@linutronix.de> <4fba57892e5bd6a1afc4a36a80b40e3ecc28cac5.camel@web.de> <2369ba83d204290dcfe157aed3f943206213b979.camel@web.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On 2026-02-17 20:10:09 [+0100], Bert Karwatzki wrote: > > I tried to research the original commit which introduced the xmit_lock_owner check, but > it is present since linux 2.3.6 (released 19990610) (when __dev_queue_xmit() was still called dev_queue_xmit()), > so I can't tell the original idea behind that check (perhaps recuesion detection ...), so I'm > not completely sure if it can be omitted (and just let dev_xmit_recursion() do the recursion checking). Okay. Thank you. I add it to my list. > Bert Karwatzki Sebastian