Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-24 Thread Matt Mackall
Simon, can you test this patch? I think it's the most straightforward 2.6.24 fix. diff -r c60016ba6237 net/core/netpoll.c --- a/net/core/netpoll.cTue Nov 13 09:09:36 2007 -0800 +++ b/net/core/netpoll.cFri Nov 23 13:10:28 2007 -0600 @@ -203,6 +203,12 @@ static void

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-24 Thread Matt Mackall
Simon, can you test this patch? I think it's the most straightforward 2.6.24 fix. diff -r c60016ba6237 net/core/netpoll.c --- a/net/core/netpoll.cTue Nov 13 09:09:36 2007 -0800 +++ b/net/core/netpoll.cFri Nov 23 13:10:28 2007 -0600 @@ -203,6 +203,12 @@ static void

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Matt Mackall
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 10:54:11PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:41:39PM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > wrote: > > Here's another thought: move all this logic into the networking core, > > unify it with current softirq zapper, then allow it to be called

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 10:54:10PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:41:39PM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > wrote: > > Here's another thought: move all this logic into the networking core, > > unify it with current softirq zapper, then

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:41:39PM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Here's another thought: move all this logic into the networking core, > unify it with current softirq zapper, then allow it to be called from > various other places (like atomic allocators). Then it'll all be in >

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Matt Mackall
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 10:32:22PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:11:20PM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:59:06PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:51:01PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL >

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:11:20PM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:59:06PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:51:01PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL > > PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:48:51PM +0300,

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Matt Mackall
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 10:15:24PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 12:59:43PM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > wrote: > > So I'd be surprised if that was a problem. But I can imagine having > > problems for skbs without destructors which run into one of these in

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Matt Mackall
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:59:06PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:51:01PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL > PROTECTED]) wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:48:51PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL > > PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > Stop, we are trying to free skb without

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 12:59:43PM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > So I'd be surprised if that was a problem. But I can imagine having > problems for skbs without destructors which run into one of these in > __kfree_skb: > > dst_release > secpath_put > nf_conntrack_put >

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Matt Mackall
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 08:57:57PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 11:07:56AM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:55:19PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 12:21:57AM -0800, Andrew Morton ([EMAIL > >

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:51:01PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:48:51PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL > PROTECTED]) wrote: > > Stop, we are trying to free skb without destructor and catch connection > > tracking, so it is not a solution. To

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:48:51PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Stop, we are trying to free skb without destructor and catch connection > tracking, so it is not a solution. To fix the problem we need to check > if it is not netfilter related, kind of this (not tested),

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 08:57:57PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > My memory here is hazy, but I think this exists to rescue netconsole > > in low-memory situations. This bit originated with Ingo, so maybe he > > can recall. > > > > Netpoll can process an arbitrary number

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 11:07:56AM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:55:19PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 12:21:57AM -0800, Andrew Morton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > wrote: > > > > [2059664.615816] __iptables__: init4 IN=ppp0

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Matt Mackall
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:55:19PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 12:21:57AM -0800, Andrew Morton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > wrote: > > > [2059664.615816] __iptables__: init4 IN=ppp0 OUT=ppp0 WARNING: at > > > kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable() > > > [2059664.620535]

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 12:21:57AM -0800, Andrew Morton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > [2059664.615816] __iptables__: init4 IN=ppp0 OUT=ppp0 WARNING: at > > kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable() > > [2059664.620535] [<80120364>] local_bh_enable+0x3c/0x97 > > [2059664.620657] [<8011c205>]

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Andrew Morton
On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 19:47:35 + Simon Arlott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > WARN during log message being output to ttyS0 and netconsole: > > [2059664.615816] __iptables__: init4 IN=ppp0 OUT=ppp0 WARNING: at > kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable() > [2059664.620535] [<80120364>]

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Andrew Morton
On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 19:47:35 + Simon Arlott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: WARN during log message being output to ttyS0 and netconsole: [2059664.615816] __iptables__: init4 IN=ppp0 OUT=ppp0 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable() [2059664.620535] [80120364]

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:11:20PM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:59:06PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:51:01PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:48:51PM +0300, Evgeniy

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Matt Mackall
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 10:15:24PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 12:59:43PM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: So I'd be surprised if that was a problem. But I can imagine having problems for skbs without destructors which run into one of these in

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Matt Mackall
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 10:54:11PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:41:39PM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Here's another thought: move all this logic into the networking core, unify it with current softirq zapper, then allow it to be called from

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:41:39PM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Here's another thought: move all this logic into the networking core, unify it with current softirq zapper, then allow it to be called from various other places (like atomic allocators). Then it'll all be in

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Matt Mackall
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 10:32:22PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:11:20PM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:59:06PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:51:01PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Matt Mackall
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 08:57:57PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 11:07:56AM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:55:19PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 12:21:57AM -0800, Andrew Morton ([EMAIL

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 12:21:57AM -0800, Andrew Morton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: [2059664.615816] __iptables__: init4 IN=ppp0 OUT=ppp0 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable() [2059664.620535] [80120364] local_bh_enable+0x3c/0x97 [2059664.620657] [8011c205]

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Matt Mackall
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:55:19PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 12:21:57AM -0800, Andrew Morton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: [2059664.615816] __iptables__: init4 IN=ppp0 OUT=ppp0 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable() [2059664.620535] [80120364]

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 11:07:56AM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:55:19PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 12:21:57AM -0800, Andrew Morton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: [2059664.615816] __iptables__: init4 IN=ppp0 OUT=ppp0

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 08:57:57PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: My memory here is hazy, but I think this exists to rescue netconsole in low-memory situations. This bit originated with Ingo, so maybe he can recall. Netpoll can process an arbitrary number of skbs

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:48:51PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Stop, we are trying to free skb without destructor and catch connection tracking, so it is not a solution. To fix the problem we need to check if it is not netfilter related, kind of this (not tested), Simon

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:51:01PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:48:51PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Stop, we are trying to free skb without destructor and catch connection tracking, so it is not a solution. To fix the

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 12:59:43PM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: So I'd be surprised if that was a problem. But I can imagine having problems for skbs without destructors which run into one of these in __kfree_skb: dst_release secpath_put nf_conntrack_put

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Matt Mackall
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:59:06PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:51:01PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 09:48:51PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Stop, we are trying to free skb without

Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-23 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 10:54:10PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 01:41:39PM -0600, Matt Mackall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Here's another thought: move all this logic into the networking core, unify it with current softirq zapper, then allow it

2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-22 Thread Simon Arlott
WARN during log message being output to ttyS0 and netconsole: [2059664.615816] __iptables__: init4 IN=ppp0 OUT=ppp0 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable() [2059664.620535] [<80120364>] local_bh_enable+0x3c/0x97 [2059664.620553] [<802e3356>] __nf_ct_ext_destroy+0x35/0x5b

2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

2007-11-22 Thread Simon Arlott
WARN during log message being output to ttyS0 and netconsole: [2059664.615816] __iptables__: init4 IN=ppp0 OUT=ppp0 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable() [2059664.620535] [80120364] local_bh_enable+0x3c/0x97 [2059664.620553] [802e3356] __nf_ct_ext_destroy+0x35/0x5b