1. 21 4月, 2008 1 次提交
    • B
      [ROSE]: Fix soft lockup wrt. rose_node_list_lock · 047f7617
      Bernard Pidoux 提交于
      [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
      2.6.25 #3
      ---------------------------------------------
      ax25ipd/3811 is trying to acquire lock:
        (rose_node_list_lock){-+..}, at: [<f8d31f1a>] rose_get_neigh+0x1a/0xa0 
      [rose]
      
      but task is already holding lock:
        (rose_node_list_lock){-+..}, at: [<f8d31fed>] 
      rose_route_frame+0x4d/0x620 [rose]
      
      other info that might help us debug this:
      6 locks held by ax25ipd/3811:
        #0:  (&tty->atomic_write_lock){--..}, at: [<c0259a1c>] 
      tty_write_lock+0x1c/0x50
        #1:  (rcu_read_lock){..--}, at: [<c02aea36>] net_rx_action+0x96/0x230
        #2:  (rcu_read_lock){..--}, at: [<c02ac5c0>] netif_receive_skb+0x100/0x2f0
        #3:  (rose_node_list_lock){-+..}, at: [<f8d31fed>] 
      rose_route_frame+0x4d/0x620 [rose]
        #4:  (rose_neigh_list_lock){-+..}, at: [<f8d31ff7>] 
      rose_route_frame+0x57/0x620 [rose]
        #5:  (rose_route_list_lock){-+..}, at: [<f8d32001>] 
      rose_route_frame+0x61/0x620 [rose]
      
      stack backtrace:
      Pid: 3811, comm: ax25ipd Not tainted 2.6.25 #3
        [<c0147e27>] print_deadlock_bug+0xc7/0xd0
        [<c0147eca>] check_deadlock+0x9a/0xb0
        [<c0149cd2>] validate_chain+0x1e2/0x310
        [<c0149b95>] ? validate_chain+0xa5/0x310
        [<c010a7d8>] ? native_sched_clock+0x88/0xc0
        [<c0149fa1>] __lock_acquire+0x1a1/0x750
        [<c014a5d1>] lock_acquire+0x81/0xa0
        [<f8d31f1a>] ? rose_get_neigh+0x1a/0xa0 [rose]
        [<c03201a3>] _spin_lock_bh+0x33/0x60
        [<f8d31f1a>] ? rose_get_neigh+0x1a/0xa0 [rose]
        [<f8d31f1a>] rose_get_neigh+0x1a/0xa0 [rose]
        [<f8d32404>] rose_route_frame+0x464/0x620 [rose]
        [<c031ffdd>] ? _read_unlock+0x1d/0x20
        [<f8d31fa0>] ? rose_route_frame+0x0/0x620 [rose]
        [<f8d1c396>] ax25_rx_iframe+0x66/0x3b0 [ax25]
        [<f8d1f42f>] ? ax25_start_t3timer+0x1f/0x40 [ax25]
        [<f8d1e65b>] ax25_std_frame_in+0x7fb/0x890 [ax25]
        [<c0320005>] ? _spin_unlock_bh+0x25/0x30
        [<f8d1bdf6>] ax25_kiss_rcv+0x2c6/0x800 [ax25]
        [<c02a4769>] ? sock_def_readable+0x59/0x80
        [<c014a8a7>] ? __lock_release+0x47/0x70
        [<c02a4769>] ? sock_def_readable+0x59/0x80
        [<c031ffdd>] ? _read_unlock+0x1d/0x20
        [<c02a4769>] ? sock_def_readable+0x59/0x80
        [<c02a4d3a>] ? sock_queue_rcv_skb+0x13a/0x1d0
        [<c02a4c45>] ? sock_queue_rcv_skb+0x45/0x1d0
        [<f8d1bb30>] ? ax25_kiss_rcv+0x0/0x800 [ax25]
        [<c02ac715>] netif_receive_skb+0x255/0x2f0
        [<c02ac5c0>] ? netif_receive_skb+0x100/0x2f0
        [<c02af05c>] process_backlog+0x7c/0xf0
        [<c02aeb0c>] net_rx_action+0x16c/0x230
        [<c02aea36>] ? net_rx_action+0x96/0x230
        [<c012bd53>] __do_softirq+0x93/0x120
        [<f8d2a68a>] ? mkiss_receive_buf+0x33a/0x3f0 [mkiss]
        [<c012be37>] do_softirq+0x57/0x60
        [<c012c265>] local_bh_enable_ip+0xa5/0xe0
        [<c0320005>] _spin_unlock_bh+0x25/0x30
        [<f8d2a68a>] mkiss_receive_buf+0x33a/0x3f0 [mkiss]
        [<c025ea37>] pty_write+0x47/0x60
        [<c025c620>] write_chan+0x1b0/0x220
        [<c0259a1c>] ? tty_write_lock+0x1c/0x50
        [<c011fec0>] ? default_wake_function+0x0/0x10
        [<c0259bea>] tty_write+0x12a/0x1c0
        [<c025c470>] ? write_chan+0x0/0x220
        [<c018bbc6>] vfs_write+0x96/0x130
        [<c0259ac0>] ? tty_write+0x0/0x1c0
        [<c018c24d>] sys_write+0x3d/0x70
        [<c0104d1e>] sysenter_past_esp+0x5f/0xa5
        =======================
      BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 61s! [ax25ipd:3811]
      
      Pid: 3811, comm: ax25ipd Not tainted (2.6.25 #3)
      EIP: 0060:[<c010a9db>] EFLAGS: 00000246 CPU: 0
      EIP is at native_read_tsc+0xb/0x20
      EAX: b404aa2c EBX: b404a9c9 ECX: 017f1000 EDX: 0000076b
      ESI: 00000001 EDI: 00000000 EBP: ecc83afc ESP: ecc83afc
        DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0033 SS: 0068
      CR0: 8005003b CR2: b7f5f000 CR3: 2cd8e000 CR4: 000006f0
      DR0: 00000000 DR1: 00000000 DR2: 00000000 DR3: 00000000
      DR6: ffff0ff0 DR7: 00000400
        [<c0204937>] delay_tsc+0x17/0x30
        [<c02048e9>] __delay+0x9/0x10
        [<c02127f6>] __spin_lock_debug+0x76/0xf0
        [<c0212618>] ? spin_bug+0x18/0x100
        [<c0147923>] ? __lock_contended+0xa3/0x110
        [<c0212998>] _raw_spin_lock+0x68/0x90
        [<c03201bf>] _spin_lock_bh+0x4f/0x60
        [<f8d31f1a>] ? rose_get_neigh+0x1a/0xa0 [rose]
        [<f8d31f1a>] rose_get_neigh+0x1a/0xa0 [rose]
        [<f8d32404>] rose_route_frame+0x464/0x620 [rose]
        [<c031ffdd>] ? _read_unlock+0x1d/0x20
        [<f8d31fa0>] ? rose_route_frame+0x0/0x620 [rose]
        [<f8d1c396>] ax25_rx_iframe+0x66/0x3b0 [ax25]
        [<f8d1f42f>] ? ax25_start_t3timer+0x1f/0x40 [ax25]
        [<f8d1e65b>] ax25_std_frame_in+0x7fb/0x890 [ax25]
        [<c0320005>] ? _spin_unlock_bh+0x25/0x30
        [<f8d1bdf6>] ax25_kiss_rcv+0x2c6/0x800 [ax25]
        [<c02a4769>] ? sock_def_readable+0x59/0x80
        [<c014a8a7>] ? __lock_release+0x47/0x70
        [<c02a4769>] ? sock_def_readable+0x59/0x80
        [<c031ffdd>] ? _read_unlock+0x1d/0x20
        [<c02a4769>] ? sock_def_readable+0x59/0x80
        [<c02a4d3a>] ? sock_queue_rcv_skb+0x13a/0x1d0
        [<c02a4c45>] ? sock_queue_rcv_skb+0x45/0x1d0
        [<f8d1bb30>] ? ax25_kiss_rcv+0x0/0x800 [ax25]
        [<c02ac715>] netif_receive_skb+0x255/0x2f0
        [<c02ac5c0>] ? netif_receive_skb+0x100/0x2f0
        [<c02af05c>] process_backlog+0x7c/0xf0
        [<c02aeb0c>] net_rx_action+0x16c/0x230
        [<c02aea36>] ? net_rx_action+0x96/0x230
        [<c012bd53>] __do_softirq+0x93/0x120
        [<f8d2a68a>] ? mkiss_receive_buf+0x33a/0x3f0 [mkiss]
        [<c012be37>] do_softirq+0x57/0x60
        [<c012c265>] local_bh_enable_ip+0xa5/0xe0
        [<c0320005>] _spin_unlock_bh+0x25/0x30
        [<f8d2a68a>] mkiss_receive_buf+0x33a/0x3f0 [mkiss]
        [<c025ea37>] pty_write+0x47/0x60
        [<c025c620>] write_chan+0x1b0/0x220
        [<c0259a1c>] ? tty_write_lock+0x1c/0x50
        [<c011fec0>] ? default_wake_function+0x0/0x10
        [<c0259bea>] tty_write+0x12a/0x1c0
        [<c025c470>] ? write_chan+0x0/0x220
        [<c018bbc6>] vfs_write+0x96/0x130
        [<c0259ac0>] ? tty_write+0x0/0x1c0
        [<c018c24d>] sys_write+0x3d/0x70
        [<c0104d1e>] sysenter_past_esp+0x5f/0xa5
        =======================
      
      Since rose_route_frame() does not use rose_node_list we can safely
      remove rose_node_list_lock spin lock here and let it be free for
      rose_get_neigh().
      Signed-off-by: NBernard Pidoux <f6bvp@amsat.org>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      047f7617
  2. 29 1月, 2008 1 次提交
    • E
      [ROSE]: Supress sparse warnings · 95b7d924
      Eric Dumazet 提交于
        CHECK   net/rose/af_rose.c
      net/rose/af_rose.c:125:11: warning: expensive signed divide
      net/rose/af_rose.c:976:46: warning: expensive signed divide
      net/rose/af_rose.c:1379:13: warning: context imbalance in 'rose_info_start' - wrong count at exit
      net/rose/af_rose.c:1406:13: warning: context imbalance in 'rose_info_stop' - unexpected unlock
        CHECK   net/rose/rose_in.c
      net/rose/rose_in.c:185:25: warning: expensive signed divide
        CHECK   net/rose/rose_route.c
      net/rose/rose_route.c:997:46: warning: expensive signed divide
      net/rose/rose_route.c:1070:13: warning: context imbalance in 'rose_node_start' - wrong count at exit
      net/rose/rose_route.c:1093:13: warning: context imbalance in 'rose_node_stop' - unexpected unlock
      net/rose/rose_route.c:1146:13: warning: context imbalance in 'rose_neigh_start' - wrong count at exit
      net/rose/rose_route.c:1169:13: warning: context imbalance in 'rose_neigh_stop' - unexpected unlock
      net/rose/rose_route.c:1229:13: warning: context imbalance in 'rose_route_start' - wrong count at exit
      net/rose/rose_route.c:1252:13: warning: context imbalance in 'rose_route_stop' - unexpected unlock
      Signed-off-by: NEric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      95b7d924
  3. 11 10月, 2007 1 次提交
    • E
      [NET]: Make the device list and device lookups per namespace. · 881d966b
      Eric W. Biederman 提交于
      This patch makes most of the generic device layer network
      namespace safe.  This patch makes dev_base_head a
      network namespace variable, and then it picks up
      a few associated variables.  The functions:
      dev_getbyhwaddr
      dev_getfirsthwbytype
      dev_get_by_flags
      dev_get_by_name
      __dev_get_by_name
      dev_get_by_index
      __dev_get_by_index
      dev_ioctl
      dev_ethtool
      dev_load
      wireless_process_ioctl
      
      were modified to take a network namespace argument, and
      deal with it.
      
      vlan_ioctl_set and brioctl_set were modified so their
      hooks will receive a network namespace argument.
      
      So basically anthing in the core of the network stack that was
      affected to by the change of dev_base was modified to handle
      multiple network namespaces.  The rest of the network stack was
      simply modified to explicitly use &init_net the initial network
      namespace.  This can be fixed when those components of the network
      stack are modified to handle multiple network namespaces.
      
      For now the ifindex generator is left global.
      
      Fundametally ifindex numbers are per namespace, or else
      we will have corner case problems with migration when
      we get that far.
      
      At the same time there are assumptions in the network stack
      that the ifindex of a network device won't change.  Making
      the ifindex number global seems a good compromise until
      the network stack can cope with ifindex changes when
      you change namespaces, and the like.
      Signed-off-by: NEric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      881d966b
  4. 08 10月, 2007 1 次提交
    • A
      [ROSE]: Fix rose.ko oops on unload · 891e6a93
      Alexey Dobriyan 提交于
      Commit a3d38402 aka
      "[AX.25]: Fix unchecked rose_add_loopback_neigh uses"
      transformed rose_loopback_neigh var into statically allocated one.
      However, on unload it will be kfree's which can't work.
      
      Steps to reproduce:
      
      	modprobe rose
      	rmmod rose
      
      BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000008
       printing eip:
      c014c664
      *pde = 00000000
      Oops: 0000 [#1]
      PREEMPT DEBUG_PAGEALLOC
      Modules linked in: rose ax25 fan ufs loop usbhid rtc snd_intel8x0 snd_ac97_codec ehci_hcd ac97_bus uhci_hcd thermal usbcore button processor evdev sr_mod cdrom
      CPU:    0
      EIP:    0060:[<c014c664>]    Not tainted VLI
      EFLAGS: 00210086   (2.6.23-rc9 #3)
      EIP is at kfree+0x48/0xa1
      eax: 00000556   ebx: c1734aa0   ecx: f6a5e000   edx: f7082000
      esi: 00000000   edi: f9a55d20   ebp: 00200287   esp: f6a5ef28
      ds: 007b   es: 007b   fs: 0000  gs: 0033  ss: 0068
      Process rmmod (pid: 1823, ti=f6a5e000 task=f7082000 task.ti=f6a5e000)
      Stack: f9a55d20 f9a5200c 00000000 00000000 00000000 f6a5e000 f9a5200c f9a55a00 
             00000000 bf818cf0 f9a51f3f f9a55a00 00000000 c0132c60 65736f72 00000000 
             f69f9630 f69f9528 c014244a f6a4e900 00200246 f7082000 c01025e6 00000000 
      Call Trace:
       [<f9a5200c>] rose_rt_free+0x1d/0x49 [rose]
       [<f9a5200c>] rose_rt_free+0x1d/0x49 [rose]
       [<f9a51f3f>] rose_exit+0x4c/0xd5 [rose]
       [<c0132c60>] sys_delete_module+0x15e/0x186
       [<c014244a>] remove_vma+0x40/0x45
       [<c01025e6>] sysenter_past_esp+0x8f/0x99
       [<c012bacf>] trace_hardirqs_on+0x118/0x13b
       [<c01025b6>] sysenter_past_esp+0x5f/0x99
       =======================
      Code: 05 03 1d 80 db 5b c0 8b 03 25 00 40 02 00 3d 00 40 02 00 75 03 8b 5b 0c 8b 73 10 8b 44 24 18 89 44 24 04 9c 5d fa e8 77 df fd ff <8b> 56 08 89 f8 e8 84 f4 fd ff e8 bd 32 06 00 3b 5c 86 60 75 0f 
      EIP: [<c014c664>] kfree+0x48/0xa1 SS:ESP 0068:f6a5ef28
      Signed-off-by: NAlexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      891e6a93
  5. 11 7月, 2007 1 次提交
  6. 04 5月, 2007 1 次提交
  7. 26 4月, 2007 1 次提交
  8. 15 2月, 2007 1 次提交
    • T
      [PATCH] remove many unneeded #includes of sched.h · cd354f1a
      Tim Schmielau 提交于
      After Al Viro (finally) succeeded in removing the sched.h #include in module.h
      recently, it makes sense again to remove other superfluous sched.h includes.
      There are quite a lot of files which include it but don't actually need
      anything defined in there.  Presumably these includes were once needed for
      macros that used to live in sched.h, but moved to other header files in the
      course of cleaning it up.
      
      To ease the pain, this time I did not fiddle with any header files and only
      removed #includes from .c-files, which tend to cause less trouble.
      
      Compile tested against 2.6.20-rc2 and 2.6.20-rc2-mm2 (with offsets) on alpha,
      arm, i386, ia64, mips, powerpc, and x86_64 with allnoconfig, defconfig,
      allmodconfig, and allyesconfig as well as a few randconfigs on x86_64 and all
      configs in arch/arm/configs on arm.  I also checked that no new warnings were
      introduced by the patch (actually, some warnings are removed that were emitted
      by unnecessarily included header files).
      Signed-off-by: NTim Schmielau <tim@physik3.uni-rostock.de>
      Acked-by: NRussell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
      Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
      Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      cd354f1a
  9. 13 2月, 2007 1 次提交
  10. 11 2月, 2007 1 次提交
  11. 18 12月, 2006 2 次提交
  12. 03 12月, 2006 1 次提交
  13. 04 5月, 2006 2 次提交
  14. 09 11月, 2005 1 次提交
  15. 26 10月, 2005 1 次提交
  16. 07 9月, 2005 1 次提交
  17. 30 8月, 2005 1 次提交
  18. 24 8月, 2005 2 次提交
  19. 17 4月, 2005 1 次提交
    • L
      Linux-2.6.12-rc2 · 1da177e4
      Linus Torvalds 提交于
      Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
      even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
      archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
      3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
      git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
      infrastructure for it.
      
      Let it rip!
      1da177e4