On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Larry Finger
<Larry.Finger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Is there a document that explains what the meaning of these semantics?
>
> inconsistent {HARDIRQ-ON-W} -> {IN-HARDIRQ-W} usage.
> kdostartupconfi/3502 [HC1[1]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] takes:
> (&(&list->lock)->rlock#5){?.-...}, at: [<ffffffff812995c6>]
> skb_queue_tail+0x26/0x60
> {HARDIRQ-ON-W} state was registered at:
I'm not sure about all the HC1[1]:SC0[0] etc stuff, but check out
Documentation/lockdep-design.txt for the basics.
In this case, someone took a lock with interrupts enabled (HARDIRQ-ON-W)
while someone else took it in a hard IRQ context (IN-HARDIRQ-W) where
they are normally disabled. The problem of course is:
cpu0:
spin_lock(&foo);
do some stuff protected by foo;
----> interrupt happens here
spin_lock(&foo); /* darn, deadlock! */
other stuff;
spin_unlock(&foo);
<----
spin_unlock(&foo);
Could be a missing _irqsave() if it's not, as Stanislaw suggested, a false
positive.
--
Bob Copeland %% www.bobcopeland.com
--
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
