Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757073AbYB0JaO (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Feb 2008 04:30:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755326AbYB0J34 (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Feb 2008 04:29:56 -0500 Received: from courier.cs.helsinki.fi ([128.214.9.1]:54970 "EHLO mail.cs.helsinki.fi" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754495AbYB0J3y (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Feb 2008 04:29:54 -0500 Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 11:29:51 +0200 (EET) From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ilpo_J=E4rvinen?=" X-X-Sender: ijjarvin@kivilampi-30.cs.helsinki.fi To: Giangiacomo Mariotti cc: LKML , Netdev , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: WARNING: at net/ipv4/tcp_input.c:2054 tcp_mark_head_lost() In-Reply-To: <20080223000310.4630daa8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Message-ID: References: <858077.97160.qm@web39709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20080223000310.4630daa8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3136 Lines: 64 On Sat, 23 Feb 2008, Andrew Morton wrote: > > (cc netdev) > > On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 20:04:39 -0800 (PST) Giangiacomo Mariotti wrote: > > > This is what I got with dmesg : > > > > [ 266.978695] WARNING: at net/ipv4/tcp_input.c:2054 tcp_mark_head_lost() > > [ 266.978701] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.24.2-my001 #1 > > [ 266.978703] > > [ 266.978704] Call Trace: > > [ 266.978706] [] tcp_ack+0x16d8/0x197f > > [ 266.978721] [] __wake_up+0x38/0x4e > > [ 266.978727] [] tcp_rcv_established+0xe2/0x8cb > > [ 266.978732] [] tcp_v4_do_rcv+0x30/0x39c > > [ 266.978738] [] tcp_v4_rcv+0x99b/0xa06 > > [ 266.978743] [] __netdev_alloc_skb+0x29/0x43 > > [ 266.978749] [] ip_local_deliver_finish+0x152/0x212 > > [ 266.978753] [] ip_rcv_finish+0x2f8/0x31b > > [ 266.978758] [] netif_receive_skb+0x3ae/0x3d1 > > [ 266.978763] [] rtl8169_rx_interrupt+0x45f/0x53e > > [ 266.978768] [] rtl8169_poll+0x36/0x16a > > [ 266.978773] [] net_rx_action+0xb7/0x1f3 > > [ 266.978778] [] __do_softirq+0x65/0xce > > [ 266.978782] [] default_idle+0x0/0x3d > > [ 266.978786] [] call_softirq+0x1c/0x28 > > [ 266.978789] [] do_softirq+0x2c/0x7d > > [ 266.978792] [] irq_exit+0x3f/0x84 > > [ 266.978794] [] do_IRQ+0xb6/0xd5 > > [ 266.978797] [] default_idle+0x0/0x3d > > [ 266.978800] [] ret_from_intr+0x0/0xa > > [ 266.978801] [] default_idle+0x29/0x3d > > [ 266.978809] [] cpu_idle+0x93/0xbb > > [ 266.978813] [] start_kernel+0x2bb/0x2c7 > > [ 266.978818] [] _sinittext+0x123/0x12a > > [ 266.978821] > > Are you able to reproduce this in any way? I did in the past a debug patch that verifies TCP's write queue state by the hard way, ie., by bruteforce walking often enough to catch inconsistencies early enough to find out the root cause. I'll try to find that for you after I first go through the 2.6.24.2's code once again (but I'm pretty busy at this moment, so it might take a small while)... > > This though didn't cause any user-visible problem. Usually it's very insignificant to see them, unless you have them in very large quantities (it usually triggers for the same occurance in a number of places where that very same thing is being checked, thus having many of them in a row once is not what I mean here). Were there Leak printouts as well a bit after that? If not, this is triggered with either non-SACK TCP or it is a genuine S+L bits bug. -- i. -- 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/