Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 01 Mar 2013 18:30:13 +0100 | From | Alexander Holler <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] mv643xx_eth: Fix a possible deadlock upon ifdown |
| |
Am 04.01.2013 21:25, schrieb Lennert Buytenhek: > On Fri, Jan 04, 2013 at 03:07:02PM +0100, Lubomir Rintel wrote: > >> From: Lubomir Rintel <lubo.rintel@gooddata.com> >> >> ================================= >> [ INFO: inconsistent lock state ] >> 3.7.0-6.luboskovo.fc19.armv5tel.kirkwood #1 Tainted: G W >> --------------------------------- >> inconsistent {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} -> {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} usage. >> NetworkManager/337 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes: >> (_xmit_ETHER#2){+.?...}, at: [<bf07adfc>] txq_reclaim+0x54/0x264 [mv643xx_eth]
I get the same annoying warning when the MTU gets changed (through dhcp).
> > Maybe I'm not reading it right, but I doubt that this is an actual > deadlock or that the patch is needed. > > txq_reclaim() indeed doesn't disable BHs, but that's because it's > always called in BH context. Almost always -- the only exception is > txq_deinit(), called from ->ndo_stop(), but by that time we've > already napi_disable()'d and netif_carrier_off()'d and free_irq()'d.
Agreed. I've just read me through that too and don't think a deadlock is possible.
> > How to explain that to lockdep, though, I don't know.
The patch helps with that. ;)
Regards,
Alexander
| |