netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] spinlock: split out debugging check from spin_lock_mutex
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 09:35:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51690AAB.1030102@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130412184542.GB19966@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>

On 04/12/13 20:45, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 04:01:04PM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> On 04/12/13 13:32, Neil Horman wrote:
>> I think there is another issue with invoking mutex_trylock() and mutex_unlock()
>> from IRQ context: as far as I can see if CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES is disabled
>> __mutex_unlock_common_slowpath() uses spin_lock() to lock mutex.wait_lock and
>> hence invoking mutex_unlock() from both non-IRQ and IRQ context is not safe.
>> Any thoughts about that ?
>>
> Yeah, its ugly, but in this specific case, its ok.  the netpoll code (in
> netpoll_send_skb disables irq on the local cpu before entering the netpoll code
> path any further, so whenver we frob this mutex from the local cpu, we're
> guaranteed not to get pre-empted by an irq.

As far as I know it is neither allowed nor safe to call 
netpoll_rx_disable() with IRQs disabled. But that function can lock the 
dev_lock mutex. What do you think will happen with 
CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES=n if an interrupt occurs during the 
mutex_lock(&ni->dev_lock) call, that mutex_lock() call has already 
locked the mutex-internal spin lock via spin_lock() and mutex_trylock() 
is invoked from inside the interrupt ? Can that result in anything else 
than deadlock and "CPU stuck" messages ?

Thanks,

Bart.

  reply	other threads:[~2013-04-13  7:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-04-11 13:42 Netpoll triggers soft lockup Bart Van Assche
2013-04-11 14:08 ` Neil Horman
2013-04-11 15:18 ` [PATCH RFC] spinlock: split out debugging check from spin_lock_mutex Neil Horman
2013-04-11 15:54   ` Christoph Paasch
2013-04-11 17:04     ` Neil Horman
2013-04-11 17:51       ` Christoph Paasch
2013-04-11 15:57   ` Eric Dumazet
2013-04-11 16:56     ` Neil Horman
2013-04-11 17:31   ` Bart Van Assche
2013-04-11 17:52     ` Neil Horman
2013-04-11 19:14     ` Neil Horman
2013-04-12  6:27       ` Bart Van Assche
2013-04-12 11:32         ` Neil Horman
2013-04-12 14:01           ` Bart Van Assche
2013-04-12 18:45             ` Neil Horman
2013-04-13  7:35               ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2013-04-13 12:03                 ` Neil Horman
2013-04-15 14:16                 ` Neil Horman
     [not found]                   ` <CAO+b5-oBfH3M0dnrQSs-p1BF_5hKy2tsU-dD=EP9+S=iqPs5ew@mail.gmail.com>
2013-04-16 17:24                     ` Neil Horman
2013-04-18 19:29                       ` Neil Horman
2013-04-22 20:12                         ` Neil Horman
     [not found]                           ` <CAO+b5-r5jVJNZWuREUH5MQ3baeSPR8fVV1p9pMnukmiZd9nRhg@mail.gmail.com>
2013-04-23 13:23                             ` Neil Horman
     [not found]                               ` <CAO+b5-rQPyO9QE9v+oQTeo+G-ftcsehSB5=63AZ13QW4EJ1X0Q@mail.gmail.com>
2013-04-23 13:44                                 ` Neil Horman
2013-04-23 17:33                                   ` David Miller
2013-04-23 17:50                                     ` Neil Horman
2013-04-27 18:53                                       ` bvba Bart Van Assche
2013-04-29 18:13                                         ` Neil Horman
2013-04-29 19:12                                           ` Bart Van Assche
2013-04-30 15:35                                           ` [PATCH RFC] netpoll: convert mutex into a semaphore Neil Horman
2013-05-01 19:00                                             ` David Miller
2013-05-01 19:34                                               ` Neil Horman
2013-04-19  8:38             ` [PATCH RFC] spinlock: split out debugging check from spin_lock_mutex Ingo Molnar
2013-04-19 12:52               ` Neil Horman
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-04-28  2:34 Neil Horman

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=51690AAB.1030102@acm.org \
    --to=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).