Francois Romieu <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> :
> [...]
>> i'm wondering, is this a genuine deadlock, or a false positive? The
>> dependency chain is quite complex, but looks realistic:
>>
>> -> #4 {&dev->xmit_lock}: [<c045294b>] dev_watchdog+0x1b/0xc0
>> -> #3 {&dev->queue_lock}: [<c0447154>] dev_queue_xmit+0x64/0x290
>> -> #2 {&((sk)->sk_lock.slock)}: [<c043eb66>] sk_clone+0x66/0x200
>> -> #1 {&((sk)->sk_lock.slock)}: [<c047a116>] tcp_v4_rcv+0x726/0x9d0
>> -> #0 {&tp->rx_lock}: [<c033e460>] rtl8139_tx_timeout+0x110/0x1f0
>
> It looks like watchdog racing against rx_poll (which should/can not
> happen). Do you have something specific in mind ?
You've got it.
rx_poll => rtl8139_rx => netif_receive_skb => ... => tcp_v4_rcv
In fact once we're at netif_receive_skb it's easy to see how we'll grab
xmit_lock again.
Prescription: Move TX timeout handling into a work queue.
Cheers,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[email protected]>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
