Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 21 Nov 2001 12:06:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 21 Nov 2001 12:06:31 -0500 Received: from minus.inr.ac.ru ([193.233.7.97]:5385 "HELO ms2.inr.ac.ru") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Wed, 21 Nov 2001 12:06:12 -0500 From: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru Message-Id: <200111211705.UAA17899@ms2.inr.ac.ru> Subject: Re: more tcpdumpinfo for nfs3 problem: aix-server --- linux 2.4.15pre5 client To: trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no (Trond Myklebust) Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 20:05:56 +0300 (MSK) Cc: davem@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: from "Trond Myklebust" at Nov 21, 1 11:07:14 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello! > Either we must demand that CPU 2 uses irq-safe spinlocks in order to > protect against sk->write_space(), Never. :-) > or we must demand that CPU 1 should drop > 'lock1' before being allowed to call dev_kfree_skb_any(). Yes, alas. Being pretty evident after seen once, this rule was _not_ evident for me until yesterday. Actually, this is very sad observation, because core has no way to detect this is a generic way... Alexey - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/