netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: ACPI/HT or Packet Scheduler BUG?

To: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: ACPI/HT or Packet Scheduler BUG?
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 21:12:36 +1000
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>, hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Tarhon-Onu Victor <mituc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, devik@xxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20050416110639.GI4114@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0504081225510.27991@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0504121526550.4822@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0504141840420.13546@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1113601029.4294.80.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1113601446.17859.36.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1113602052.4294.89.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050415225422.GF4114@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050416014906.GA3291@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050416110639.GI4114@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i
On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 01:06:39PM +0200, Thomas Graf wrote:
> 
> qdisc_destroy can still be invoked without qdisc_tree_lock via the
> deletion of a class when it calls qdisc_destroy to destroy its
> leaf qdisc.

Indeed.  Fortuantely HTB seems to be safe as it calls sch_tree_lock
which is another name for qdisc_tree_lock.  CBQ on the other hand
needs to have a little tweak.

> I will look into this.

Thanks,
-- 
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>