* 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).