lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Mar]   [27]   [last100]   RSS-feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Complete thread (EXPERIMENTAL)
/
DateThu, 27 Mar 2008 11:07:00 +0100
FromJarek Poplawski <>
SubjectRe: [Bugme-new] [Bug 10326] New: inconsistent lock state in net_rx_action
Digg This
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 02:18:12AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: ...
Anyway, the accusation is that lockdep is busted, in that it doesn't realise that local_irq_disable() blocks softirqs.

Usually lockdep gets this right, so I've some doubts too. But here it's not only about softirqs; this:

Mar 25 19:48:46 better kernel: #1: (target_list_lock){--..}, at: [<c0399c0d>]

means lockdep saw hardirqs enabled while acquiring/holding this lock.
Jarek P.



\
ISP Services
Valid XHTML 1.0!\ /
Valid CSS! Last update: 2008-03-27 11:05    [W:1.933 / U:0.000 seconds]
©2003-2005 Jasper Spaans