lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [May]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: Strange soft lockup detected message (looks like spin_lock bug in pcnet32)
    From
    On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 01:44:56PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
    > On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 11:40:09AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
    > > On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 05:34:38PM +0200, Frederik Deweerdt wrote:
    > > > For the "what" part, see Documentation/lockdep-design.txt. You'll enable
    > > > it by with SPINLOCK_DEBUG, indeed.
    > >
    > > Well I hope to see it hit the BUG again soon then to see what it has to
    > > say.
    >
    > Well I didn't see anything for a while with SPINLOCK_DEBUG enabled
    > (maybe I didn't wait long enough). So I tried changing it to
    > spin_lock_irqsave, and that didn't go well. I got this as the result
    > now:
    >
    > onfiguring network interfaces...eth1: link up, 100Mbps, full-duplex
    > BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#0, ifconfig/962
    > lock: cf7a3304, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: ifconfig/962, .owner_cpu: 0
    > [<c0104024>] dump_stack+0x24/0x30
    > [<c01e3947>] _raw_spin_lock+0x137/0x140
    > [<c02981ec>] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x1c/0x30
    > [<d084eb86>] pcnet32_interrupt+0x216/0x290 [pcnet32]
    > [<c013b95d>] handle_IRQ_event+0x3d/0x70
    > [<c013ba2c>] __do_IRQ+0x9c/0x120
    > [<c0105025>] do_IRQ+0x25/0x60
    > [<c010316a>] common_interrupt+0x1a/0x20
    > [<c011927a>] __do_softirq+0x3a/0xa0
    > [<c011930d>] do_softirq+0x2d/0x30
    > [<c0119557>] irq_exit+0x37/0x40
    > [<c010502a>] do_IRQ+0x2a/0x60
    > [<c010316a>] common_interrupt+0x1a/0x20
    > [<c02983c0>] _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x10/0x40
    > [<d08517ea>] pcnet32_open+0x27a/0x390 [pcnet32]
    > [<c02343e9>] dev_open+0x39/0x80
    > [<c0232b5a>] dev_change_flags+0xfa/0x130
    > [<c0277b7f>] devinet_ioctl+0x4ff/0x6f0
    > [<c0227b24>] sock_ioctl+0xf4/0x1f0
    > [<c017027c>] do_ioctl+0x2c/0x80
    > [<c0170322>] vfs_ioctl+0x52/0x2f0
    > [<c017062f>] sys_ioctl+0x6f/0x80
    > [<c0102f27>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
    > [<b7eebd04>] 0xb7eebd04
    > BUG: spinlock lockup on CPU#0, ifconfig/962, cf7a3304
    > [<c0104024>] dump_stack+0x24/0x30
    > [<c01e391f>] _raw_spin_lock+0x10f/0x140
    > [<c02981ec>] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x1c/0x30
    > [<d084eb86>] pcnet32_interrupt+0x216/0x290 [pcnet32]
    > [<c013b95d>] handle_IRQ_event+0x3d/0x70
    > [<c013ba2c>] __do_IRQ+0x9c/0x120
    > [<c0105025>] do_IRQ+0x25/0x60
    > [<c010316a>] common_interrupt+0x1a/0x20
    > [<c011927a>] __do_softirq+0x3a/0xa0
    > [<c011930d>] do_softirq+0x2d/0x30
    > [<c0119557>] irq_exit+0x37/0x40
    > [<c010502a>] do_IRQ+0x2a/0x60
    > [<c010316a>] common_interrupt+0x1a/0x20
    > [<c02983c0>] _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x10/0x40
    > [<d08517ea>] pcnet32_open+0x27a/0x390 [pcnet32]
    > [<c02343e9>] dev_open+0x39/0x80
    > [<c0232b5a>] dev_change_flags+0xfa/0x130
    > [<c0277b7f>] devinet_ioctl+0x4ff/0x6f0
    > [<c0227b24>] sock_ioctl+0xf4/0x1f0
    > [<c017027c>] do_ioctl+0x2c/0x80
    > [<c0170322>] vfs_ioctl+0x52/0x2f0
    > [<c017062f>] sys_ioctl+0x6f/0x80
    > [<c0102f27>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
    > [<b7eebd04>] 0xb7eebd04
    >
    > Obviously that wasn't so good.

    Nevermind. I am obviously an idiot today placing spin_lock_irqsave both
    in place of spin_lock and spin_unlock. Yeah that will work well. Now
    to try with spin_lock_irqrestore or whatever it is called.

    --
    Len Sorensen
    -
    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: 2007-05-04 19:53    [W:0.026 / U:30.696 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site