lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Nov]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] softirq: Use local_irq_save() in local_bh_enable()
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 05:16:17PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > This report: http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=122599341430090&w=2
> > shows local_bh_enable() is used in the wrong context (irqs
> > disabled). It happens when a usual network receive path is called by
> > netconsole, which simply turns off irqs around this all. Probably
> > this is wrong, but it worked like this long time, and it's not
> > trivial to fix this.
> >
> > Anyway, a commit 0f476b6d91a1395bda6464e653ce66ea9bea7167 "softirq:
> > remove irqs_disabled warning from local_bh_enable" can break things
> > after changing from local_irq_save() to local_irq_disable(). Before
> > this commit there was only a warning, now a lockup is possible, so
> > it could be treated as a regression. This patch reverts the change
> > in irqs.
>
> hm, but calling local_bh_enable() with hardirqs off is a bug. It might
> be a long-standing bug, but it can cause lockups even with that change
> reverted: when we process softirqs in local_bh_enable().

I think it's what they call a regression: this is a long-standing bug,
and this commit doesn't fix this, but can cause additional lockups.

> So why not
> fix the bug instead?

It's not about instead: this bug could be fixed as well (if somebody
knows how to do it "properly" without hacks like:
if (!in_irq())
local_bh_disable();
etc.; but, I guess, the network code has more such bh disabling).

Jarek P.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-11-18 08:41    [W:0.047 / U:0.236 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site