On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 02:37:54 -0000 subashab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> We are seeing a WARN due to local_bh_disable called with interrupts
> disabled with CONFIG_IRQSOFF_TRACER / CONFIG_PREEMPT_TRACER.
AFAIK this WARN happens due to a being called from hardware interrupt
context. __local_bh_disable_ip calls: WARN_ON_ONCE(in_irq());
> Here is the WARN trace
>
> 1833.210427: <6> Call trace:
> 1833.212833: <2> [<ffffffc000088530>] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x270
> 1833.212838: <2> [<ffffffc0000887b0>] show_stack+0x10/0x1c
> 1833.212853: <2> [<ffffffc000c6edac>] dump_stack+0x74/0xb8
> 1833.212862: <2> [<ffffffc0000a0fe4>] warn_slowpath_common+0x88/0xb0
> 1833.212865: <2> [<ffffffc0000a10d0>] warn_slowpath_null+0x14/0x20
> 1833.212870: <2> [<ffffffc0000a46dc>] __local_bh_disable_ip+0x4c/0xc8
> 1833.212882: <2> [<ffffffc000ae2788>] destroy_conntrack+0x90/0x184
> 1833.212888: <2> [<ffffffc000adcd50>] nf_conntrack_destroy+0x28/0x38
> 1833.212896: <2> [<ffffffc000a97550>] skb_release_head_state+0xa4/0xe0
> 1833.212900: <2> [<ffffffc000a977e0>] __kfree_skb+0x10/0xbc
> 1833.212904: <2> [<ffffffc000a976bc>] kfree_skb+0xb4/0xdc
> 1833.212912: <2> [<ffffffc000aa4660>] flush_backlog+0x88/0x120
> 1833.212922: <2> [<ffffffc00010e544>] flush_smp_call_function_queue+0xb4/0x154
> 1833.212926: <2> [<ffffffc00010efcc>] generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt+0xc/0x18
> 1833.212932: <2> [<ffffffc000091050>] handle_IPI+0x120/0x338
> 1833.212937: <2> [<ffffffc000081580>] gic_handle_irq+0xb8/0xdc
The call gic_handle_irq() sounds like a hardware IRQ func/context.
The flush_backlog() call is due to the device is being unregistered.
> Here is the callstack which leads to this WARN.
>
> netdev_run_todo
> on_each_cpu //This disables irq with local_irq_save(flags)
> flush_backlog
> kfree_skb
> ..
> destroy_conntrack //This disables irq's again through local_bh_disable
__local_bh_disable_ip() (when CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS is enabled) calls:
raw_local_irq_save(flags);
raw_local_irq_restore(flags);
Thus, it should be safe, as the save/restore variants are used.
> I noticed that this was introduced by commit ca7433df3a ("netfilter:
> conntrack: seperate expect locking from nf_conntrack_lock ").
>
> Since interrupts are already disabled when flush_backlog is called, is it
> expected to disable bottom halves in destroy_conntrack?
I'm surprised to see kfree_skb() being called from hardirq context, I
though that was not allowed.
AFAIK this is the reason we have: __dev_kfree_skb_any() which defer
freeing the SKB if (in_irq() || irqs_disabled()).
Code:
void __dev_kfree_skb_any(struct sk_buff *skb, enum skb_free_reason reason)
{
if (in_irq() || irqs_disabled())
__dev_kfree_skb_irq(skb, reason);
else
dev_kfree_skb(skb);
}
> --
> Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux
> Foundation Collaborative Project
--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer
MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
Author of http://www.iptv-analyzer.org
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
