| To: | Nivedita Singhvi <niv@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [Fwd: [Bug 3003] New: might_sleep warning when setting up IPSec with IPCOMP] |
| From: | Christophe Saout <christophe@xxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 02 Jul 2004 23:35:59 +0200 |
| Cc: | James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, akpm@xxxxxxxx, netdev <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, mjbligh@xxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <40E5D326.5000509@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <40E5A1B3.2020202@xxxxxxxxxx> <40E5D326.5000509@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Am Fr, den 02.07.2004 um 14:27 Uhr -0700 schrieb Nivedita Singhvi: > We are grabbing dst->xfrm lock in ipcomp_output(), > and have it held when we call ipcomp_compress(). > > Is that the issue? I don't have the crypto module > code, but in_atomic() will be true. Yes. But the code might also be called from softirq context, when a packed from the NIC gets handled or when a slot in the queue becomes free. (I've also got warnings from those two cases in my logs) The compress/decompress calls should be able to be run from softirq (atomic) context just like encrypt/decrypt. I'm just wondering, why does deflate_compress call deflate_comp_init when it is called the first time, but deflate_init is a noop? Shouldn't the deflate_comp_init call just be moved to deflate_init?
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [Fwd: [Bug 3003] New: might_sleep warning when setting up IPSec with IPCOMP], Nivedita Singhvi |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Fwd: [Bug 3003] New: might_sleep warning when setting up IPSec with IPCOMP], Andrew Morton |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [Fwd: [Bug 3003] New: might_sleep warning when setting up IPSec with IPCOMP], Nivedita Singhvi |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Fwd: [Bug 3003] New: might_sleep warning when setting up IPSec with IPCOMP], Andrew Morton |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |