Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755186AbYGYThF (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:37:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751499AbYGYTgv (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:36:51 -0400 Received: from xc.sipsolutions.net ([83.246.72.84]:48239 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751191AbYGYTgu (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:36:50 -0400 Subject: Re: Kernel WARNING: at net/core/dev.c:1330 __netif_schedule+0x2c/0x98() From: Johannes Berg To: Jarek Poplawski Cc: Ingo Oeser , David Miller , peterz@infradead.org, Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net, kaber@trash.net, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com In-Reply-To: <20080725193416.GB3107@ami.dom.local> (sfid-20080725_213320_802558_E914336B) References: <1216806614.7257.152.camel@twins> <1216810696.7257.175.camel@twins> <20080723.131441.200166513.davem@davemloft.net> <200807251904.37302.netdev@axxeo.de> <20080725183622.GA3107@ami.dom.local> <1217013384.4758.5.camel@johannes.berg> <20080725193416.GB3107@ami.dom.local> (sfid-20080725_213320_802558_E914336B) Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-e2sQ7gS5VeqmczjeqMrm" Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:36:15 +0200 Message-Id: <1217014575.4758.7.camel@johannes.berg> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2051 Lines: 53 --=-e2sQ7gS5VeqmczjeqMrm Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 21:34 +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > > Umm, of course it cannot, because then we'd have to take the mutex in > > the TX path, which we cannot. We cannot have another lock in the TX > > path, what's so hard to understand about? We need to be able to lock al= l > > queues to lock out multiple tx paths at once in some (really) slow path= s > > but not have any extra lock overhead for the tx path, especially not a > > single lock. >=20 > But this mutex doesn't have to be mutex. And it's not for the tx path, > only for "service" just like netif_tx_lock(). The fast path needs only > queue->tx_lock. No, we need to be able to lock out multiple TX paths at once. johannes --=-e2sQ7gS5VeqmczjeqMrm Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Johannes Berg (powerbook) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJIiissAAoJEKVg1VMiehFYW8sP/2K5cOt7mAUYh5kg0yNPoC9l x9gcX638YniIOkHw9zDrIfDfoYa4Z2b2DRXLCF1IdJNVoSGCoI2H9eOyIPUBvn62 6h1jSa007+ejU3+iCGmxajiBxFMAg9ZH8uvUvxAZD7AsCHwq6Ix3R11lBPbxNB8S O6g827ZdQIxnJvyGEbf1FD58F26q9gH0HflfTVVEMq9TtP7KI4KzNugx3d0T1gko uEZRS7x6pThCQW5azlA78+Z9eG6o6OLkspOU6RV0lpN9BgleJJMjteFAVF9nMUG6 mj1MdRGfpZBNaxg2iNnYgVaqwb0Xp5llIwcC3SnEcnlieTRlJb15NXJmt+rBmiF7 /geJ6KgT/kODN5Dc5Y6OIDHRdAsb93vcExANzN5tFUpQCFUADXQkbeQVm1LN0fiE mmf/ZfE/apXyziQ4iXQsQxZnpcGodbiDvpQXbLCCae7r5hTwD0RDi0YM38YwrKiB BCfzmquREat7Jm5XfLxSOkaaJGjqgMQpe3/pc+uOVQD5icThjSWGazEHi1sFaiL9 3P3eOo3cPmWX4dj08ohG18lU4p+EjnjTzBSfxI2axvNlQb+R9a5EOXzcuECu2KEG Pa17HJ43YL6+XtkXKkX12s+8C0enLxYc0Q6+kLx7fGMSlCJr7ddixzJx9LWoFcun vyTR9nUGNr6J+8RHtRrk =8gfk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-e2sQ7gS5VeqmczjeqMrm-- -- 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/