lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: eata irq abuse (was: Re: Linux 2.5.60)
Date
Yes, you are correct. I used spin_unlock in order to release the local
driver lock
during the scsi_register call, but I forgot that I had the irq disabled as
well.
SO the correct fix is to use spin_unlock_irq/spin_lock_irq around the
scsi_register call. Same fix applies to the u14-34f driver.

Cheers,

*********************************
Ph.D. Dario Ballabio
EMC Computer Systems Italia spa
Mobile phone +393487978851
Office phone +390244571315
Mobile fax +393487951622

*** Si vis pacem, para bellum ***


-----Original Message-----
From: Manfred Spraul [mailto:manfred@colorfullife.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 6:46 PM
To: Zephaniah E. Hull
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org;
linux-eata@i-connect.net
Subject: eata irq abuse (was: Re: Linux 2.5.60)


Zephaniah wrote:

>kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:1102!

Slab notices that a function that expects enabled local interrupts is called
with disabled local interrupts.


>Call Trace:
> [<c014a3b3>] do_tune_cpucache+0x83/0x240

do_tune_cpucache:
the function call smp_call_function(), and that is only permitted with
enabled local interrupts. The complain is correct.


> [<c014a300>] do_ccpupdate_local+0x0/0x30
> [<c014a5c1>] enable_cpucache+0x51/0x80
> [<c0148ea5>] kmem_cache_create+0x4a5/0x560

Within kmem_cache_create. kmem_cache_create checks for in_interrupt(), thus
someone probably does

spin_lock_irqsave();
kmem_cache_create();


> [<c0285dd2>] scsi_setup_command_freelist+0xa2/0x130

calls kmem_cache_create()

> [<c02887e0>] scsi_register+0x3c0/0x660

calls scsi_setup_command_freelist


> [<c02919a1>] get_pci_dev+0x31/0x50

?? probably stale

> [<c0291df2>] port_detect+0x3c2/0xe50

Do you have an eata scsi controller?

Ugs.
eata2x_detect():
* spin_lock_irqsave();
* calls port_detect();
* * spin_unlock();
* * scsi_register.

Eata maintainers: Is that necessary?
Why do the interrupts remain disabled across scsi_register?
Is that a bug workaround, or an oversight?
I'd use

spin_unlock_irq();
scsi_register();
spin_lock_irq();

--
Manfred


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.067 / U:1.304 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site