On 2015-02-10 11:34, Yuwei Zheng wrote:
> The ath9k_hif_usb_rx_cb function excute on the interrupt context, and ath9k_rx_tasklet excute
> on the soft irq context. In other words, the ath9k_hif_usb_rx_cb have more chance to excute than
> ath9k_rx_tasklet. So in the worst condition, the rx.rxbuf receive list is always full,
> and the do {}while(true) loop will not be break. The kernel get a soft lockup panic.
>
> [59011.007210] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 23s!
> [kworker/0:0:30609]
> [59011.030560] BUG: scheduling while atomic: kworker/0:0/30609/0x40010100
> [59013.804486] BUG: scheduling while atomic: kworker/0:0/30609/0x40010100
> [59013.858522] Kernel panic - not syncing: softlockup: hung tasks
>
> [59014.038891] Exception stack(0xdf4bbc38 to 0xdf4bbc80)
> [59014.046834] bc20: de57b950 60000113
> [59014.059579] bc40: 00000000 bb32bb32 60000113 de57b948 de57b500 dc7bb440 df4bbcd0 00000000
> [59014.072337] bc60: de57b950 60000113 df4bbcd0 df4bbc80 c04c259d c04c25a0 60000133 ffffffff
> [59014.085233] [<c04c28db>] (__irq_svc+0x3b/0x5c) from [<c04c25a0>] (_raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0xc/0x10)
> [59014.100437] [<c04c25a0>] (_raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0xc/0x10) from [<bf9c2089>] (ath9k_rx_tasklet+0x290/0x490 [ath9k_htc])
> [59014.118267] [<bf9c2089>] (ath9k_rx_tasklet+0x290/0x490 [ath9k_htc]) from [<c0036d23>] (tasklet_action+0x3b/0x98)
> [59014.134132] [<c0036d23>] (tasklet_action+0x3b/0x98) from [<c0036709>] (__do_softirq+0x99/0x16c)
> [59014.147784] [<c0036709>] (__do_softirq+0x99/0x16c) from [<c00369f7>] (irq_exit+0x5b/0x5c)
> [59014.160653] [<c00369f7>] (irq_exit+0x5b/0x5c) from [<c000cfc3>] (handle_IRQ+0x37/0x78)
> [59014.173124] [<c000cfc3>] (handle_IRQ+0x37/0x78) from [<c00085df>] (omap3_intc_handle_irq+0x5f/0x68)
> [59014.187225] [<c00085df>] (omap3_intc_handle_irq+0x5f/0x68) from [<c04c28db>](__irq_svc+0x3b/0x5c)
>
> This bug can be see with low performance board, such as uniprocessor beagle bone board. Add some debug
> message in the ath9k_hif_usb_rx_cb function may trigger this bug quickly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yuwei Zheng <yuweizheng@xxxxxxx>
This approach of interaction between tasklet and workqueue processing
seems quite complex to me. Wouldn't it be simpler and better to simply
always run the rx processing code in workqueue context?
That way it can go on processing forever (as long as there is data to be
received), while the scheduler ensures that it doesn't interfere with
other critical work on the CPU.
- Felix
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
