Return-path: Received: from mail.axxeo.de ([82.100.226.146]:40683 "EHLO mail.axxeo.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750858AbYGYRwV (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:52:21 -0400 From: Ingo Oeser To: David Miller Subject: Re: Kernel WARNING: at net/core/dev.c:1330 __netif_schedule+0x2c/0x98() Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 19:04:36 +0200 Cc: peterz@infradead.org, jarkao2@gmail.com, 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 References: <1216806614.7257.152.camel@twins> <1216810696.7257.175.camel@twins> <20080723.131441.200166513.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20080723.131441.200166513.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200807251904.37302.netdev@axxeo.de> (sfid-20080725_195233_999652_C4461A86) Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi David, David Miller schrieb: > From: Peter Zijlstra > Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:58:16 +0200 > > > So I guess my question is, is netif_tx_lock() here to stay, or is the > > right fix to convert all those drivers to use __netif_tx_lock() which > > locks only a single queue? > > It's staying. > > It's trying to block all potential calls into the ->hard_start_xmit() > method of the driver, and the only reliable way to do that is to take > all the TX queue locks. And in one form or another, we're going to > have this "grab/release all the TX queue locks" construct. > > I find it interesting that this cannot be simply described to lockdep > :-) I'm sure as hell, I miss sth. but can't it be done by this pseudo-code: netif_tx_lock(device) { mutex_lock(device->queue_entry_mutex); foreach_queue_entries(queue, device->queues) { spin_lock(queue->tx_lock); set_noop_tx_handler(queue); spin_unlock(queue->tx_lock); } mutex_unlock(device->queue_entry_mutex); } netif_tx_unlock(device) { mutex_lock(device->queue_entry_mutex); foreach_queue_entries(queue, device->queues) { spin_lock(queue->tx_lock); set_useful_tx_handler(queue); spin_unlock(queue->tx_lock); } mutex_unlock(device->queue_entry_mutex); } Then protect use of the queues by queue->tx_lock in transmit path. The first setup of the queue doesn't need to be protected, since no-one knows the device. The final cleanup of the device doesn't need to be protected either, because netif_tx_lock() and netif_tx_unlock() should not be called after entering the final cleanup. Some VM locking works this way... Best Regards Ingo Oeser