On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 08:22:58AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>
> however I'm not quite yet convinced that this patch is going to solve
> this particular deadlock.
> (I agree with the principle of it and I think it's really needed,
> I just don't yet see how it's going to solve this specific deadlock. But
> then again it's early and I've not had sufficient coffee yet so I could
> well be wrong)
Well it solves the dead lock by breaking the chain that links the
netlink system with the jungle of wireless locking :)
The spin lock in sk_buff_head acts as a mediator. We only feed the
skb to the netlink system once that spin lock has been dropped.
> it's not just about irq context, it's about being called with any lock
> that's
> used in IRQ context; that is what makes this double nasty...
Yes it is nasty. However, so far wireless seems to be the only offender.
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]
