From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Subject: Re: RCU stall in af_unix.c, should use spin_lock_irqsave? Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 12:13:04 +0200 Message-ID: <20141021121304.076d5acd@free-electrons.com> References: <20141021100313.397f4962@free-electrons.com> <1413886132.32553.14.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexandre FOURNIER , Ezequiel Garcia , Marcin Wojtas , Gregory =?UTF-8?B?Q2zDqW1lbnQ=?= To: Hannes Frederic Sowa Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1413886132.32553.14.camel@localhost> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Dear Hannes Frederic Sowa, On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 12:08:52 +0200, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: > On Di, 2014-10-21 at 10:03 +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > > So, the question is: is this patch the correct solution (but then other > > usage of spin_lock in af_unix.c might also need fixing) ? Or is the > > network driver at fault? > > It feels like a false positive. Do you see one core spinning tightly on > a lock? Does the system get unusable? Interrupts are still enabled (for example, sysrq are still working), but scheduling no longer takes place (all processes are blocked). Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com