* ixgbe: RTNL assertion failed
@ 2013-05-03 19:09 Stephen Hemminger
2013-05-03 23:17 ` Skidmore, Donald C
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Hemminger @ 2013-05-03 19:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff Kirsher; +Cc: netdev
Running 3.9 kernel, ixgbe is splatting on resume from suspend.
[26430.213254] ixgbe 0000:01:00.0: setting latency timer to 64
[26430.213257] RTNL: assertion failed at /build/buildd-linux_3.2.41-2-amd64-Wvc92F/linux-3.2.41/net/core/dev.c (1758)
[26430.213259] Pid: 7839, comm: kworker/u:1 Not tainted 3.2.0-4-amd64 #1 Debian 3.2.41-2
[26430.213261] Call Trace:
[26430.213266] [<ffffffff8128b89e>] ? netif_set_real_num_tx_queues+0x5c/0x15e
[26430.213286] [<ffffffffa0051749>] ? ixgbe_set_num_queues+0x208/0x221 [ixgbe]
[26430.213287] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Starting disk
[26430.213292] [<ffffffffa0054949>] ? ixgbe_init_interrupt_scheme+0x16/0x790 [ixgbe]
[26430.213299] [<ffffffffa0055aae>] ? ixgbe_resume+0x7a/0xe3 [ixgbe]
[26430.213303] [<ffffffff81255b7c>] ? pm_op+0xa1/0x141
[26430.213305] [<ffffffff81255f40>] ? device_resume+0xa2/0xfc
[26430.213307] [<ffffffff81255fae>] ? async_resume+0x14/0x38
[26430.213311] [<ffffffff810648c4>] ? async_run_entry_fn+0x96/0x142
[26430.213313] [<ffffffff8105b225>] ? process_one_work+0x161/0x264
[26430.213316] [<ffffffff8105c1e6>] ? worker_thread+0xc2/0x145
[26430.213318] [<ffffffff8105c124>] ? manage_workers.isra.25+0x15b/0x15b
[26430.213320] [<ffffffff8105f321>] ? kthread+0x76/0x7e
[26430.213323] [<ffffffff81354ab4>] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
[26430.213325] [<ffffffff8105f2ab>] ? kthread_worker_fn+0x139/0x139
[26430.213327] [<ffffffff81354ab0>] ? gs_change+0x13/0x13
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* RE: ixgbe: RTNL assertion failed
2013-05-03 19:09 ixgbe: RTNL assertion failed Stephen Hemminger
@ 2013-05-03 23:17 ` Skidmore, Donald C
2013-05-04 1:54 ` Ben Hutchings
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Skidmore, Donald C @ 2013-05-03 23:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Hemminger, Kirsher, Jeffrey T; +Cc: netdev
> -----Original Message-----
> From: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:netdev-
> owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger
> Sent: Friday, May 03, 2013 12:09 PM
> To: Kirsher, Jeffrey T
> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: ixgbe: RTNL assertion failed
>
> Running 3.9 kernel, ixgbe is splatting on resume from suspend.
>
> [26430.213254] ixgbe 0000:01:00.0: setting latency timer to 64 [26430.213257]
> RTNL: assertion failed at /build/buildd-linux_3.2.41-2-amd64-Wvc92F/linux-
> 3.2.41/net/core/dev.c (1758) [26430.213259] Pid: 7839, comm: kworker/u:1
> Not tainted 3.2.0-4-amd64 #1 Debian 3.2.41-2 [26430.213261] Call Trace:
> [26430.213266] [<ffffffff8128b89e>] ?
> netif_set_real_num_tx_queues+0x5c/0x15e
> [26430.213286] [<ffffffffa0051749>] ? ixgbe_set_num_queues+0x208/0x221
> [ixgbe] [26430.213287] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Starting disk [26430.213292]
> [<ffffffffa0054949>] ? ixgbe_init_interrupt_scheme+0x16/0x790 [ixgbe]
> [26430.213299] [<ffffffffa0055aae>] ? ixgbe_resume+0x7a/0xe3 [ixgbe]
> [26430.213303] [<ffffffff81255b7c>] ? pm_op+0xa1/0x141 [26430.213305]
> [<ffffffff81255f40>] ? device_resume+0xa2/0xfc [26430.213307]
> [<ffffffff81255fae>] ? async_resume+0x14/0x38 [26430.213311]
> [<ffffffff810648c4>] ? async_run_entry_fn+0x96/0x142 [26430.213313]
> [<ffffffff8105b225>] ? process_one_work+0x161/0x264 [26430.213316]
> [<ffffffff8105c1e6>] ? worker_thread+0xc2/0x145 [26430.213318]
> [<ffffffff8105c124>] ? manage_workers.isra.25+0x15b/0x15b
> [26430.213320] [<ffffffff8105f321>] ? kthread+0x76/0x7e [26430.213323]
> [<ffffffff81354ab4>] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10 [26430.213325]
> [<ffffffff8105f2ab>] ? kthread_worker_fn+0x139/0x139 [26430.213327]
> [<ffffffff81354ab0>] ? gs_change+0x13/0x13
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body
> of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at
> http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hey Stephen,
I'm having a little problem finding a path were we call netif_set_real_num_tx_queues without holding RTNL in net-next. While looking over the stack dump one of our engineers noticed the text "Not tainted 3.2.0-4-amd64 #1 Debian 3.2.41-2 ". Could this mean I'm looking over the wrong source? It would make me feel better as I'm not seeing anything as is. :)
Thanks,
-Don Skidmore <donald.c.skidmore@intel.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: ixgbe: RTNL assertion failed
2013-05-03 23:17 ` Skidmore, Donald C
@ 2013-05-04 1:54 ` Ben Hutchings
2013-05-04 3:51 ` Stephen Hemminger
2013-05-04 21:05 ` Skidmore, Donald C
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Ben Hutchings @ 2013-05-04 1:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Skidmore, Donald C; +Cc: Stephen Hemminger, Kirsher, Jeffrey T, netdev
On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 11:17:39PM +0000, Skidmore, Donald C wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:netdev-
> > owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger
> > Sent: Friday, May 03, 2013 12:09 PM
> > To: Kirsher, Jeffrey T
> > Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
> > Subject: ixgbe: RTNL assertion failed
> >
> > Running 3.9 kernel, ixgbe is splatting on resume from suspend.
> >
> > [26430.213254] ixgbe 0000:01:00.0: setting latency timer to 64 [26430.213257]
> > RTNL: assertion failed at /build/buildd-linux_3.2.41-2-amd64-Wvc92F/linux-
> > 3.2.41/net/core/dev.c (1758) [26430.213259] Pid: 7839, comm: kworker/u:1
> > Not tainted 3.2.0-4-amd64 #1 Debian 3.2.41-2 [26430.213261] Call Trace:
[...]
> I'm having a little problem finding a path were we call netif_set_real_num_tx_queues without holding RTNL in net-next. While looking over the stack dump one of our engineers noticed the text "Not tainted 3.2.0-4-amd64 #1 Debian 3.2.41-2 ". Could this mean I'm looking over the wrong source? It would make me feel better as I'm not seeing anything as is. :)
Indeed, this is not 3.9.
The version of ixgbe in this Debian kernel has bql support backported,
but is otherwise the same as in 3.2.41. I assume that this bug has
been fixed some time between 3.2 and 3.9, but no-one requested that
the fix be included in stable branches. Please can you identify the
fix?
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking.
- Albert Camus
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: ixgbe: RTNL assertion failed
2013-05-04 1:54 ` Ben Hutchings
@ 2013-05-04 3:51 ` Stephen Hemminger
2013-05-04 21:05 ` Skidmore, Donald C
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Hemminger @ 2013-05-04 3:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Hutchings; +Cc: Skidmore, Donald C, Kirsher, Jeffrey T, netdev
On Sat, 4 May 2013 02:54:06 +0100
Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 11:17:39PM +0000, Skidmore, Donald C wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:netdev-
> > > owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger
> > > Sent: Friday, May 03, 2013 12:09 PM
> > > To: Kirsher, Jeffrey T
> > > Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
> > > Subject: ixgbe: RTNL assertion failed
> > >
> > > Running 3.9 kernel, ixgbe is splatting on resume from suspend.
> > >
> > > [26430.213254] ixgbe 0000:01:00.0: setting latency timer to 64 [26430.213257]
> > > RTNL: assertion failed at /build/buildd-linux_3.2.41-2-amd64-Wvc92F/linux-
> > > 3.2.41/net/core/dev.c (1758) [26430.213259] Pid: 7839, comm: kworker/u:1
> > > Not tainted 3.2.0-4-amd64 #1 Debian 3.2.41-2 [26430.213261] Call Trace:
> [...]
> > I'm having a little problem finding a path were we call netif_set_real_num_tx_queues without holding RTNL in net-next. While looking over the stack dump one of our engineers noticed the text "Not tainted 3.2.0-4-amd64 #1 Debian 3.2.41-2 ". Could this mean I'm looking over the wrong source? It would make me feel better as I'm not seeing anything as is. :)
>
> Indeed, this is not 3.9.
>
> The version of ixgbe in this Debian kernel has bql support backported,
> but is otherwise the same as in 3.2.41. I assume that this bug has
> been fixed some time between 3.2 and 3.9, but no-one requested that
> the fix be included in stable branches. Please can you identify the
> fix?
>
> Ben.
>
Yeah, it was a Debian kernel, thought it was 3.9, must have been swapping kernels.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* RE: ixgbe: RTNL assertion failed
2013-05-04 1:54 ` Ben Hutchings
2013-05-04 3:51 ` Stephen Hemminger
@ 2013-05-04 21:05 ` Skidmore, Donald C
2013-05-04 21:21 ` Ben Hutchings
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Skidmore, Donald C @ 2013-05-04 21:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Hutchings; +Cc: Stephen Hemminger, Kirsher, Jeffrey T, netdev
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben Hutchings [mailto:ben@decadent.org.uk]
> Sent: Friday, May 03, 2013 6:54 PM
> To: Skidmore, Donald C
> Cc: Stephen Hemminger; Kirsher, Jeffrey T; netdev@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: ixgbe: RTNL assertion failed
>
> On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 11:17:39PM +0000, Skidmore, Donald C wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:netdev-
> > > owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger
> > > Sent: Friday, May 03, 2013 12:09 PM
> > > To: Kirsher, Jeffrey T
> > > Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
> > > Subject: ixgbe: RTNL assertion failed
> > >
> > > Running 3.9 kernel, ixgbe is splatting on resume from suspend.
> > >
> > > [26430.213254] ixgbe 0000:01:00.0: setting latency timer to 64
> > > [26430.213257]
> > > RTNL: assertion failed at
> > > /build/buildd-linux_3.2.41-2-amd64-Wvc92F/linux-
> > > 3.2.41/net/core/dev.c (1758) [26430.213259] Pid: 7839, comm:
> > > kworker/u:1 Not tainted 3.2.0-4-amd64 #1 Debian 3.2.41-2 [26430.213261]
> Call Trace:
> [...]
> > I'm having a little problem finding a path were we call
> > netif_set_real_num_tx_queues without holding RTNL in net-next. While
> > looking over the stack dump one of our engineers noticed the text "Not
> > tainted 3.2.0-4-amd64 #1 Debian 3.2.41-2 ". Could this mean I'm
> > looking over the wrong source? It would make me feel better as I'm
> > not seeing anything as is. :)
>
> Indeed, this is not 3.9.
>
> The version of ixgbe in this Debian kernel has bql support backported, but is
> otherwise the same as in 3.2.41. I assume that this bug has been fixed some
> time between 3.2 and 3.9, but no-one requested that the fix be included in
> stable branches. Please can you identify the fix?
>
> Ben.
>
> --
> Ben Hutchings
> We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking.
> - Albert Camus
I believe this is the patch:
commit 34948a947d1a576c10afee6d14792fd237549577
Author: Benjamin Poirier <bpoirier@suse.de>
Date: Fri Apr 6 07:20:21 2012 +0000
ixgbe: add missing rtnl_lock in PM resume path
Upon resume from standby, ixgbe may trigger the ASSERT_RTNL() in
netif_set_real_num_tx_queues(). The call stack is:
netif_set_real_num_tx_queues
ixgbe_set_num_queues
ixgbe_init_interrupt_scheme
ixgbe_resume
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Poirier <bpoirier@suse.de>
Tested-by: Stephen Ko <stephen.s.ko@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i
index dac7c01..9e2be8c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
@@ -4836,7 +4836,9 @@ static int ixgbe_resume(struct pci_dev *pdev)
pci_wake_from_d3(pdev, false);
+ rtnl_lock();
err = ixgbe_init_interrupt_scheme(adapter);
+ rtnl_unlock();
if (err) {
e_dev_err("Cannot initialize interrupts for device\n");
return err;
Thanks,
-Don Skidmore <donald.c.skidmore@intel.com>
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: ixgbe: RTNL assertion failed
2013-05-04 21:05 ` Skidmore, Donald C
@ 2013-05-04 21:21 ` Ben Hutchings
2013-05-06 14:58 ` Stephen Hemminger
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Ben Hutchings @ 2013-05-04 21:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Skidmore, Donald C, Stephen Hemminger; +Cc: netdev, Kirsher, Jeffrey T
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1077 bytes --]
On Sat, 2013-05-04 at 21:05 +0000, Skidmore, Donald C wrote:
[...]
> > The version of ixgbe in this Debian kernel has bql support backported, but is
> > otherwise the same as in 3.2.41. I assume that this bug has been fixed some
> > time between 3.2 and 3.9, but no-one requested that the fix be included in
> > stable branches. Please can you identify the fix?
> >
> > Ben.
> >
> > --
> > Ben Hutchings
> > We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking.
> > - Albert Camus
>
> I believe this is the patch:
>
> commit 34948a947d1a576c10afee6d14792fd237549577
> Author: Benjamin Poirier <bpoirier@suse.de>
> Date: Fri Apr 6 07:20:21 2012 +0000
>
> ixgbe: add missing rtnl_lock in PM resume path
[...]
Looks like it. And it applies cleanly to 3.2.y. Stephen, could you
test this on top of 3.2.y and then nominate it for stable?
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Lowery's Law:
If it jams, force it. If it breaks, it needed replacing anyway.
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: ixgbe: RTNL assertion failed
2013-05-04 21:21 ` Ben Hutchings
@ 2013-05-06 14:58 ` Stephen Hemminger
2013-05-10 4:36 ` Ben Hutchings
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Hemminger @ 2013-05-06 14:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Hutchings; +Cc: Skidmore, Donald C, netdev, Kirsher, Jeffrey T
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1179 bytes --]
On Sat, 04 May 2013 22:21:32 +0100
Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-05-04 at 21:05 +0000, Skidmore, Donald C wrote:
> [...]
> > > The version of ixgbe in this Debian kernel has bql support backported, but is
> > > otherwise the same as in 3.2.41. I assume that this bug has been fixed some
> > > time between 3.2 and 3.9, but no-one requested that the fix be included in
> > > stable branches. Please can you identify the fix?
> > >
> > > Ben.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Ben Hutchings
> > > We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking.
> > > - Albert Camus
> >
> > I believe this is the patch:
> >
> > commit 34948a947d1a576c10afee6d14792fd237549577
> > Author: Benjamin Poirier <bpoirier@suse.de>
> > Date: Fri Apr 6 07:20:21 2012 +0000
> >
> > ixgbe: add missing rtnl_lock in PM resume path
> [...]
>
> Looks like it. And it applies cleanly to 3.2.y. Stephen, could you
> test this on top of 3.2.y and then nominate it for stable?
>
> Ben.
>
Patch works.
Tested with 3.2.44 with this patch and there is no problem.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: ixgbe: RTNL assertion failed
2013-05-06 14:58 ` Stephen Hemminger
@ 2013-05-10 4:36 ` Ben Hutchings
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Ben Hutchings @ 2013-05-10 4:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Hemminger; +Cc: Skidmore, Donald C, netdev, Kirsher, Jeffrey T
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1450 bytes --]
On Mon, 2013-05-06 at 07:58 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Sat, 04 May 2013 22:21:32 +0100
> Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2013-05-04 at 21:05 +0000, Skidmore, Donald C wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > The version of ixgbe in this Debian kernel has bql support backported, but is
> > > > otherwise the same as in 3.2.41. I assume that this bug has been fixed some
> > > > time between 3.2 and 3.9, but no-one requested that the fix be included in
> > > > stable branches. Please can you identify the fix?
> > > >
> > > > Ben.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Ben Hutchings
> > > > We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking.
> > > > - Albert Camus
> > >
> > > I believe this is the patch:
> > >
> > > commit 34948a947d1a576c10afee6d14792fd237549577
> > > Author: Benjamin Poirier <bpoirier@suse.de>
> > > Date: Fri Apr 6 07:20:21 2012 +0000
> > >
> > > ixgbe: add missing rtnl_lock in PM resume path
> > [...]
> >
> > Looks like it. And it applies cleanly to 3.2.y. Stephen, could you
> > test this on top of 3.2.y and then nominate it for stable?
> >
> > Ben.
> >
>
> Patch works.
> Tested with 3.2.44 with this patch and there is no problem.
Thanks, I've added this to my queue.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
For every action, there is an equal and opposite criticism. - Harrison
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-05-10 4:36 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-05-03 19:09 ixgbe: RTNL assertion failed Stephen Hemminger
2013-05-03 23:17 ` Skidmore, Donald C
2013-05-04 1:54 ` Ben Hutchings
2013-05-04 3:51 ` Stephen Hemminger
2013-05-04 21:05 ` Skidmore, Donald C
2013-05-04 21:21 ` Ben Hutchings
2013-05-06 14:58 ` Stephen Hemminger
2013-05-10 4:36 ` Ben Hutchings
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.