On Fri, 2006-07-07 at 12:09 -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2006 20:13:09 +0200 > > > Now a question for netdev: what is the interrupt-or-softirq rules for > > the sk_receive_queue.lock? > > > > Anyway, the patch below fixes this deadlock; it may or may not be the > > correct solution depending on the netdev answer, but the deadlock is > > gone ;) > > The lockdep fixes are starting to cause us to go in and start adding > hard IRQ protection to many socket layer objects and I want this > thinking to end quickly :)
that's why I asked the question ;) > To reiterate, nothing socket or SKB level should be taking anything > deeper than software IRQ locking. > > If drivers manage local SKB queues in hard IRQ context, they need to > use a seperate lockdep identifier for that queue's lock. I'm not so sure that;s the case here, but.. if you have time today I hope you can take a look at this one with a wider "network view" than I can.. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html