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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans