* UDP/bnx2: inconsistent lock state (Re: linux-next: Tree for October 30)
@ 2008-10-30 10:40 Alexander Beregalov
2008-10-30 12:59 ` Alexander Beregalov
2008-10-30 13:21 ` Eric Dumazet
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Alexander Beregalov @ 2008-10-30 10:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: mchan; +Cc: linux-next, Netdev
bnx2 0000:03:00.0: irq 38 for MSI/MSI-X
bnx2: eth0: using MSI
bnx2: eth0 NIC Copper Link is Up, 1000 Mbps full duplex, receive &
transmit flow control ON
[ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
2.6.28-rc2-next-20081030 #4
---------------------------------
inconsistent {softirq-on-W} -> {in-softirq-W} usage.
swapper/0 [HC0[0]:SC1[1]:HE1:SE0] takes:
(&table->hash[i].lock){-+..}, at: [<ffffffff804ea8c5>]
__udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
{softirq-on-W} state was registered at:
[<ffffffff80257ea0>] __lock_acquire+0x2fd/0xc72
[<ffffffff8025889a>] lock_acquire+0x85/0xa9
[<ffffffff80525527>] _spin_lock+0x3c/0x70
[<ffffffff804eaca2>] udp_lib_unhash+0x2b/0x90
[<ffffffff804ab315>] sk_common_release+0x2f/0x83
[<ffffffff804e9631>] udp_lib_close+0x9/0xb
[<ffffffff804f1274>] inet_release+0x58/0x5f
[<ffffffff804a889e>] sock_release+0x20/0xc1
[<ffffffff804a8973>] sock_close+0x34/0x3a
[<ffffffff8029e8ee>] __fput+0xc5/0x164
[<ffffffff8029e9a2>] fput+0x15/0x17
[<ffffffff8029be90>] filp_close+0x67/0x72
[<ffffffff8023864a>] put_files_struct+0x74/0xc8
[<ffffffff802386e5>] exit_files+0x47/0x4f
[<ffffffff80239f28>] do_exit+0x27a/0x8b7
[<ffffffff8023a5e4>] do_group_exit+0x7f/0xaf
[<ffffffff8023a626>] sys_exit_group+0x12/0x14
[<ffffffff8020b6fb>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
[<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
irq event stamp: 56806
hardirqs last enabled at (56806): [<ffffffff8023bf15>]
_local_bh_enable_ip+0xba/0xe3
hardirqs last disabled at (56805): [<ffffffff8023beaf>]
_local_bh_enable_ip+0x54/0xe3
softirqs last enabled at (56786): [<ffffffff8023c0ec>] __do_softirq+0xf8/0x104
softirqs last disabled at (56791): [<ffffffff8020cbac>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x28
other info that might help us debug this:
no locks held by swapper/0.
stack backtrace:
Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.28-rc2-next-20081030 #4
Call Trace:
<IRQ> [<ffffffff80256a9c>] valid_state+0x179/0x18c
[<ffffffff80256fda>] mark_lock+0x14d/0x37a
[<ffffffff80257e25>] __lock_acquire+0x282/0xc72
[<ffffffff804c9a91>] ? rt_intern_hash+0x442/0x45c
[<ffffffff8023bf47>] ? local_bh_enable_ip+0x9/0xb
[<ffffffff8025889a>] lock_acquire+0x85/0xa9
[<ffffffff804ea8c5>] ? __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
[<ffffffff80525527>] _spin_lock+0x3c/0x70
[<ffffffff804ea8c5>] ? __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
[<ffffffff804ea8c5>] __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
[<ffffffff804eac75>] udp_rcv+0x15/0x17
[<ffffffff804cc1ec>] ip_local_deliver+0xad/0x13d
[<ffffffff804cc107>] ip_rcv+0x4b7/0x4ef
[<ffffffff804b3efb>] netif_receive_skb+0x213/0x23a
[<ffffffff8042fa7c>] bnx2_poll_work+0x92e/0xaa5
[<ffffffff8024f935>] ? getnstimeofday+0x3a/0x96
[<ffffffff8025011e>] ? do_settimeofday+0x7f/0x131
[<ffffffff8025001e>] ? update_wall_time+0x38e/0x40f
[<ffffffff80256ea9>] ? mark_lock+0x1c/0x37a
[<ffffffff802694f4>] ? __rcu_read_lock+0xa0/0xaf
[<ffffffff8042fe41>] bnx2_poll+0x128/0x20d
[<ffffffff804b2935>] net_rx_action+0xd2/0x1f4
[<ffffffff8023c064>] __do_softirq+0x70/0x104
[<ffffffff8020cbac>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x28
[<ffffffff8020e1d5>] do_softirq+0x39/0x8a
[<ffffffff8023bc89>] irq_exit+0x45/0xa2
[<ffffffff8020e4e6>] do_IRQ+0x16a/0x19c
[<ffffffff8020bc8b>] ret_from_intr+0x0/0xf
<EOI> [<ffffffff80212d69>] ? mwait_idle+0x3e/0x48
[<ffffffff80212d60>] ? mwait_idle+0x35/0x48
[<ffffffff8020a8db>] ? cpu_idle+0x59/0xc2
[<ffffffff8051feb4>] ? start_secondary+0x263/0x26b
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: UDP/bnx2: inconsistent lock state (Re: linux-next: Tree for October 30)
2008-10-30 10:40 UDP/bnx2: inconsistent lock state (Re: linux-next: Tree for October 30) Alexander Beregalov
@ 2008-10-30 12:59 ` Alexander Beregalov
2008-10-30 13:22 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-10-30 13:21 ` Eric Dumazet
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Alexander Beregalov @ 2008-10-30 12:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: mchan; +Cc: linux-next, Netdev
2008/10/30 Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>:
> bnx2 0000:03:00.0: irq 38 for MSI/MSI-X
> bnx2: eth0: using MSI
> bnx2: eth0 NIC Copper Link is Up, 1000 Mbps full duplex, receive &
> transmit flow control ON
>
> [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
> 2.6.28-rc2-next-20081030 #4
> ---------------------------------
> inconsistent {softirq-on-W} -> {in-softirq-W} usage.
> swapper/0 [HC0[0]:SC1[1]:HE1:SE0] takes:
> (&table->hash[i].lock){-+..}, at: [<ffffffff804ea8c5>]
> __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
> {softirq-on-W} state was registered at:
> [<ffffffff80257ea0>] __lock_acquire+0x2fd/0xc72
> [<ffffffff8025889a>] lock_acquire+0x85/0xa9
> [<ffffffff80525527>] _spin_lock+0x3c/0x70
> [<ffffffff804eaca2>] udp_lib_unhash+0x2b/0x90
> [<ffffffff804ab315>] sk_common_release+0x2f/0x83
> [<ffffffff804e9631>] udp_lib_close+0x9/0xb
> [<ffffffff804f1274>] inet_release+0x58/0x5f
> [<ffffffff804a889e>] sock_release+0x20/0xc1
> [<ffffffff804a8973>] sock_close+0x34/0x3a
> [<ffffffff8029e8ee>] __fput+0xc5/0x164
> [<ffffffff8029e9a2>] fput+0x15/0x17
> [<ffffffff8029be90>] filp_close+0x67/0x72
> [<ffffffff8023864a>] put_files_struct+0x74/0xc8
> [<ffffffff802386e5>] exit_files+0x47/0x4f
> [<ffffffff80239f28>] do_exit+0x27a/0x8b7
> [<ffffffff8023a5e4>] do_group_exit+0x7f/0xaf
> [<ffffffff8023a626>] sys_exit_group+0x12/0x14
> [<ffffffff8020b6fb>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
> [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
> irq event stamp: 56806
> hardirqs last enabled at (56806): [<ffffffff8023bf15>]
> _local_bh_enable_ip+0xba/0xe3
> hardirqs last disabled at (56805): [<ffffffff8023beaf>]
> _local_bh_enable_ip+0x54/0xe3
> softirqs last enabled at (56786): [<ffffffff8023c0ec>] __do_softirq+0xf8/0x104
> softirqs last disabled at (56791): [<ffffffff8020cbac>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x28
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
> no locks held by swapper/0.
>
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.28-rc2-next-20081030 #4
> Call Trace:
> <IRQ> [<ffffffff80256a9c>] valid_state+0x179/0x18c
> [<ffffffff80256fda>] mark_lock+0x14d/0x37a
> [<ffffffff80257e25>] __lock_acquire+0x282/0xc72
> [<ffffffff804c9a91>] ? rt_intern_hash+0x442/0x45c
> [<ffffffff8023bf47>] ? local_bh_enable_ip+0x9/0xb
> [<ffffffff8025889a>] lock_acquire+0x85/0xa9
> [<ffffffff804ea8c5>] ? __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
> [<ffffffff80525527>] _spin_lock+0x3c/0x70
> [<ffffffff804ea8c5>] ? __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
> [<ffffffff804ea8c5>] __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
> [<ffffffff804eac75>] udp_rcv+0x15/0x17
> [<ffffffff804cc1ec>] ip_local_deliver+0xad/0x13d
> [<ffffffff804cc107>] ip_rcv+0x4b7/0x4ef
> [<ffffffff804b3efb>] netif_receive_skb+0x213/0x23a
> [<ffffffff8042fa7c>] bnx2_poll_work+0x92e/0xaa5
> [<ffffffff8024f935>] ? getnstimeofday+0x3a/0x96
> [<ffffffff8025011e>] ? do_settimeofday+0x7f/0x131
> [<ffffffff8025001e>] ? update_wall_time+0x38e/0x40f
> [<ffffffff80256ea9>] ? mark_lock+0x1c/0x37a
> [<ffffffff802694f4>] ? __rcu_read_lock+0xa0/0xaf
> [<ffffffff8042fe41>] bnx2_poll+0x128/0x20d
> [<ffffffff804b2935>] net_rx_action+0xd2/0x1f4
> [<ffffffff8023c064>] __do_softirq+0x70/0x104
> [<ffffffff8020cbac>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x28
> [<ffffffff8020e1d5>] do_softirq+0x39/0x8a
> [<ffffffff8023bc89>] irq_exit+0x45/0xa2
> [<ffffffff8020e4e6>] do_IRQ+0x16a/0x19c
> [<ffffffff8020bc8b>] ret_from_intr+0x0/0xf
> <EOI> [<ffffffff80212d69>] ? mwait_idle+0x3e/0x48
> [<ffffffff80212d60>] ? mwait_idle+0x35/0x48
> [<ffffffff8020a8db>] ? cpu_idle+0x59/0xc2
> [<ffffffff8051feb4>] ? start_secondary+0x263/0x26b
>
Similar issue on sparc/sunhme
[ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
2.6.28-rc2-next-20081030 #12
---------------------------------
inconsistent {softirq-on-W} -> {in-softirq-W} usage.
swapper/0 [HC0[0]:SC1[1]:HE1:SE0] takes:
(&table->hash[i].lock){-+..}, at: [<000000000069fbd0>]
__udp4_lib_rcv+0x344/0x840
{softirq-on-W} state was registered at:
[<00000000006dbe30>] _spin_lock+0x30/0x48
[<00000000006a0128>] udp_lib_unhash+0x2c/0xa4
[<0000000000656030>] sk_common_release+0x34/0x8c
[<000000000069e588>] udp_lib_close+0x10/0x20
[<00000000006a78a4>] inet_release+0x54/0x64
[<00000000006530b0>] sock_release+0x20/0x9c
[<0000000000653164>] sock_close+0x38/0x4c
[<00000000004b496c>] __fput+0xcc/0x1b4
[<00000000004b4a7c>] fput+0x28/0x38
[<00000000004b1c40>] filp_close+0x74/0x88
[<00000000004b1cf0>] sys_close+0x9c/0xf8
[<0000000000406154>] linux_sparc_syscall32+0x34/0x40
irq event stamp: 91778
hardirqs last enabled at (91778): [<0000000000455a20>]
local_bh_enable_ip+0xc4/0xf0
hardirqs last disabled at (91777): [<00000000004559b4>]
local_bh_enable_ip+0x58/0xf0
softirqs last enabled at (91764): [<0000000000455cfc>] __do_softirq+0x108/0x118
softirqs last disabled at (91767): [<000000000042d948>] do_softirq+0x7c/0xbc
other info that might help us debug this:
no locks held by swapper/0.
stack backtrace:
Call Trace:
[0000000000472168] print_usage_bug+0x1bc/0x1cc
[0000000000472cac] mark_lock+0x564/0xe9c
[0000000000474b44] __lock_acquire+0x778/0x1ac8
[0000000000475ef0] lock_acquire+0x5c/0x74
[00000000006dbe30] _spin_lock+0x30/0x48
[000000000069fbd0] __udp4_lib_rcv+0x344/0x840
[00000000006a00e8] udp_rcv+0x1c/0x30
[000000000067d1bc] ip_local_deliver+0xe0/0x168
[000000000067d0a0] ip_rcv+0x51c/0x558
[000000000066048c] netif_receive_skb+0x32c/0x358
[0000000000660548] process_backlog+0x90/0x114
[000000000065eb20] net_rx_action+0xd0/0x1e4
[0000000000455c68] __do_softirq+0x74/0x118
[000000000042d948] do_softirq+0x7c/0xbc
[0000000000455738] irq_exit+0x54/0xc0
[000000000042da84] handler_irq+0xfc/0x114
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: UDP/bnx2: inconsistent lock state (Re: linux-next: Tree for October 30)
2008-10-30 12:59 ` Alexander Beregalov
@ 2008-10-30 13:22 ` Eric Dumazet
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Eric Dumazet @ 2008-10-30 13:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexander Beregalov; +Cc: mchan, linux-next, Netdev
Alexander Beregalov a écrit :
> 2008/10/30 Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>:
>> bnx2 0000:03:00.0: irq 38 for MSI/MSI-X
>> bnx2: eth0: using MSI
>> bnx2: eth0 NIC Copper Link is Up, 1000 Mbps full duplex, receive &
>> transmit flow control ON
>>
>> [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
>> 2.6.28-rc2-next-20081030 #4
>> ---------------------------------
>> inconsistent {softirq-on-W} -> {in-softirq-W} usage.
>> swapper/0 [HC0[0]:SC1[1]:HE1:SE0] takes:
>> (&table->hash[i].lock){-+..}, at: [<ffffffff804ea8c5>]
>> __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
>> {softirq-on-W} state was registered at:
>> [<ffffffff80257ea0>] __lock_acquire+0x2fd/0xc72
>> [<ffffffff8025889a>] lock_acquire+0x85/0xa9
>> [<ffffffff80525527>] _spin_lock+0x3c/0x70
>> [<ffffffff804eaca2>] udp_lib_unhash+0x2b/0x90
>> [<ffffffff804ab315>] sk_common_release+0x2f/0x83
>> [<ffffffff804e9631>] udp_lib_close+0x9/0xb
>> [<ffffffff804f1274>] inet_release+0x58/0x5f
>> [<ffffffff804a889e>] sock_release+0x20/0xc1
>> [<ffffffff804a8973>] sock_close+0x34/0x3a
>> [<ffffffff8029e8ee>] __fput+0xc5/0x164
>> [<ffffffff8029e9a2>] fput+0x15/0x17
>> [<ffffffff8029be90>] filp_close+0x67/0x72
>> [<ffffffff8023864a>] put_files_struct+0x74/0xc8
>> [<ffffffff802386e5>] exit_files+0x47/0x4f
>> [<ffffffff80239f28>] do_exit+0x27a/0x8b7
>> [<ffffffff8023a5e4>] do_group_exit+0x7f/0xaf
>> [<ffffffff8023a626>] sys_exit_group+0x12/0x14
>> [<ffffffff8020b6fb>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>> [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
>> irq event stamp: 56806
>> hardirqs last enabled at (56806): [<ffffffff8023bf15>]
>> _local_bh_enable_ip+0xba/0xe3
>> hardirqs last disabled at (56805): [<ffffffff8023beaf>]
>> _local_bh_enable_ip+0x54/0xe3
>> softirqs last enabled at (56786): [<ffffffff8023c0ec>] __do_softirq+0xf8/0x104
>> softirqs last disabled at (56791): [<ffffffff8020cbac>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x28
>>
>> other info that might help us debug this:
>> no locks held by swapper/0.
>>
>> stack backtrace:
>> Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.28-rc2-next-20081030 #4
>> Call Trace:
>> <IRQ> [<ffffffff80256a9c>] valid_state+0x179/0x18c
>> [<ffffffff80256fda>] mark_lock+0x14d/0x37a
>> [<ffffffff80257e25>] __lock_acquire+0x282/0xc72
>> [<ffffffff804c9a91>] ? rt_intern_hash+0x442/0x45c
>> [<ffffffff8023bf47>] ? local_bh_enable_ip+0x9/0xb
>> [<ffffffff8025889a>] lock_acquire+0x85/0xa9
>> [<ffffffff804ea8c5>] ? __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
>> [<ffffffff80525527>] _spin_lock+0x3c/0x70
>> [<ffffffff804ea8c5>] ? __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
>> [<ffffffff804ea8c5>] __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
>> [<ffffffff804eac75>] udp_rcv+0x15/0x17
>> [<ffffffff804cc1ec>] ip_local_deliver+0xad/0x13d
>> [<ffffffff804cc107>] ip_rcv+0x4b7/0x4ef
>> [<ffffffff804b3efb>] netif_receive_skb+0x213/0x23a
>> [<ffffffff8042fa7c>] bnx2_poll_work+0x92e/0xaa5
>> [<ffffffff8024f935>] ? getnstimeofday+0x3a/0x96
>> [<ffffffff8025011e>] ? do_settimeofday+0x7f/0x131
>> [<ffffffff8025001e>] ? update_wall_time+0x38e/0x40f
>> [<ffffffff80256ea9>] ? mark_lock+0x1c/0x37a
>> [<ffffffff802694f4>] ? __rcu_read_lock+0xa0/0xaf
>> [<ffffffff8042fe41>] bnx2_poll+0x128/0x20d
>> [<ffffffff804b2935>] net_rx_action+0xd2/0x1f4
>> [<ffffffff8023c064>] __do_softirq+0x70/0x104
>> [<ffffffff8020cbac>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x28
>> [<ffffffff8020e1d5>] do_softirq+0x39/0x8a
>> [<ffffffff8023bc89>] irq_exit+0x45/0xa2
>> [<ffffffff8020e4e6>] do_IRQ+0x16a/0x19c
>> [<ffffffff8020bc8b>] ret_from_intr+0x0/0xf
>> <EOI> [<ffffffff80212d69>] ? mwait_idle+0x3e/0x48
>> [<ffffffff80212d60>] ? mwait_idle+0x35/0x48
>> [<ffffffff8020a8db>] ? cpu_idle+0x59/0xc2
>> [<ffffffff8051feb4>] ? start_secondary+0x263/0x26b
>>
>
> Similar issue on sparc/sunhme
>
>
Yes, its a generic problem, I replied to your previous mail with a proper fix
Thank you
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: UDP/bnx2: inconsistent lock state (Re: linux-next: Tree for October 30)
2008-10-30 10:40 UDP/bnx2: inconsistent lock state (Re: linux-next: Tree for October 30) Alexander Beregalov
2008-10-30 12:59 ` Alexander Beregalov
@ 2008-10-30 13:21 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-10-30 21:01 ` UDP/bnx2: inconsistent lock state David Miller
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Eric Dumazet @ 2008-10-30 13:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexander Beregalov; +Cc: mchan, linux-next, Netdev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4018 bytes --]
Alexander Beregalov a écrit :
> bnx2 0000:03:00.0: irq 38 for MSI/MSI-X
> bnx2: eth0: using MSI
> bnx2: eth0 NIC Copper Link is Up, 1000 Mbps full duplex, receive &
> transmit flow control ON
>
> [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ]
> 2.6.28-rc2-next-20081030 #4
> ---------------------------------
> inconsistent {softirq-on-W} -> {in-softirq-W} usage.
> swapper/0 [HC0[0]:SC1[1]:HE1:SE0] takes:
> (&table->hash[i].lock){-+..}, at: [<ffffffff804ea8c5>]
> __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
> {softirq-on-W} state was registered at:
> [<ffffffff80257ea0>] __lock_acquire+0x2fd/0xc72
> [<ffffffff8025889a>] lock_acquire+0x85/0xa9
> [<ffffffff80525527>] _spin_lock+0x3c/0x70
> [<ffffffff804eaca2>] udp_lib_unhash+0x2b/0x90
> [<ffffffff804ab315>] sk_common_release+0x2f/0x83
> [<ffffffff804e9631>] udp_lib_close+0x9/0xb
> [<ffffffff804f1274>] inet_release+0x58/0x5f
> [<ffffffff804a889e>] sock_release+0x20/0xc1
> [<ffffffff804a8973>] sock_close+0x34/0x3a
> [<ffffffff8029e8ee>] __fput+0xc5/0x164
> [<ffffffff8029e9a2>] fput+0x15/0x17
> [<ffffffff8029be90>] filp_close+0x67/0x72
> [<ffffffff8023864a>] put_files_struct+0x74/0xc8
> [<ffffffff802386e5>] exit_files+0x47/0x4f
> [<ffffffff80239f28>] do_exit+0x27a/0x8b7
> [<ffffffff8023a5e4>] do_group_exit+0x7f/0xaf
> [<ffffffff8023a626>] sys_exit_group+0x12/0x14
> [<ffffffff8020b6fb>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
> [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
> irq event stamp: 56806
> hardirqs last enabled at (56806): [<ffffffff8023bf15>]
> _local_bh_enable_ip+0xba/0xe3
> hardirqs last disabled at (56805): [<ffffffff8023beaf>]
> _local_bh_enable_ip+0x54/0xe3
> softirqs last enabled at (56786): [<ffffffff8023c0ec>] __do_softirq+0xf8/0x104
> softirqs last disabled at (56791): [<ffffffff8020cbac>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x28
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
> no locks held by swapper/0.
>
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.28-rc2-next-20081030 #4
> Call Trace:
> <IRQ> [<ffffffff80256a9c>] valid_state+0x179/0x18c
> [<ffffffff80256fda>] mark_lock+0x14d/0x37a
> [<ffffffff80257e25>] __lock_acquire+0x282/0xc72
> [<ffffffff804c9a91>] ? rt_intern_hash+0x442/0x45c
> [<ffffffff8023bf47>] ? local_bh_enable_ip+0x9/0xb
> [<ffffffff8025889a>] lock_acquire+0x85/0xa9
> [<ffffffff804ea8c5>] ? __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
> [<ffffffff80525527>] _spin_lock+0x3c/0x70
> [<ffffffff804ea8c5>] ? __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
> [<ffffffff804ea8c5>] __udp4_lib_rcv+0x2a5/0x640
> [<ffffffff804eac75>] udp_rcv+0x15/0x17
> [<ffffffff804cc1ec>] ip_local_deliver+0xad/0x13d
> [<ffffffff804cc107>] ip_rcv+0x4b7/0x4ef
> [<ffffffff804b3efb>] netif_receive_skb+0x213/0x23a
> [<ffffffff8042fa7c>] bnx2_poll_work+0x92e/0xaa5
> [<ffffffff8024f935>] ? getnstimeofday+0x3a/0x96
> [<ffffffff8025011e>] ? do_settimeofday+0x7f/0x131
> [<ffffffff8025001e>] ? update_wall_time+0x38e/0x40f
> [<ffffffff80256ea9>] ? mark_lock+0x1c/0x37a
> [<ffffffff802694f4>] ? __rcu_read_lock+0xa0/0xaf
> [<ffffffff8042fe41>] bnx2_poll+0x128/0x20d
> [<ffffffff804b2935>] net_rx_action+0xd2/0x1f4
> [<ffffffff8023c064>] __do_softirq+0x70/0x104
> [<ffffffff8020cbac>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x28
> [<ffffffff8020e1d5>] do_softirq+0x39/0x8a
> [<ffffffff8023bc89>] irq_exit+0x45/0xa2
> [<ffffffff8020e4e6>] do_IRQ+0x16a/0x19c
> [<ffffffff8020bc8b>] ret_from_intr+0x0/0xf
> <EOI> [<ffffffff80212d69>] ? mwait_idle+0x3e/0x48
> [<ffffffff80212d60>] ? mwait_idle+0x35/0x48
> [<ffffffff8020a8db>] ? cpu_idle+0x59/0xc2
> [<ffffffff8051feb4>] ? start_secondary+0x263/0x26b
Thanks for the report Alexander
We need to use spin_lock_bh()/spin_unlock_bh() in udp_lib_unhash()
Previous code was doing a write_lock_bh()/write_unlock_bh(), I cannot
believe I missed this obvious thing...
[PATCH] udp: Should use spin_lock_bh()/spin_unlock_bh() in udp_lib_unhash()
Spotted by Alexander Beregalov
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
[-- Attachment #2: udp_lib_unhash.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 563 bytes --]
diff --git a/net/ipv4/udp.c b/net/ipv4/udp.c
index c3ecec8..f760b86 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/udp.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/udp.c
@@ -970,12 +970,12 @@ void udp_lib_unhash(struct sock *sk)
unsigned int hash = udp_hashfn(sock_net(sk), sk->sk_hash);
struct udp_hslot *hslot = &udptable->hash[hash];
- spin_lock(&hslot->lock);
+ spin_lock_bh(&hslot->lock);
if (sk_del_node_init_rcu(sk)) {
inet_sk(sk)->num = 0;
sock_prot_inuse_add(sock_net(sk), sk->sk_prot, -1);
}
- spin_unlock(&hslot->lock);
+ spin_unlock_bh(&hslot->lock);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(udp_lib_unhash);
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-10-30 21:02 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-10-30 10:40 UDP/bnx2: inconsistent lock state (Re: linux-next: Tree for October 30) Alexander Beregalov
2008-10-30 12:59 ` Alexander Beregalov
2008-10-30 13:22 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-10-30 13:21 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-10-30 21:01 ` UDP/bnx2: inconsistent lock state David Miller
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).