Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 7 Feb 2003 11:07:33 +1100 | From | David Gibson <> | Subject | Re: 2.5 kernel + hostap_cs + X11 = scheduling while atomic |
| |
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 09:27:59AM -0800, Jean Tourrilhes wrote: > On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 09:28:49PM -0800, Jouni Malinen wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 11:36:37PM -0800, Joshua Kwan wrote: > > > > > However, a combination of running said kernel, hostap_cs, and X11 produces > > > this nasty infinite string of errors: > > > > > > bad: scheduling while atomic! > > > Call Trace: > > > > > [<d2948a30>] hfa384x_get_rid+0x36/0x2d6b7606 [hostap_cs] > > > > That will sleep, so it better not be called while in interrupt context > > or apparently also, while atomic with preemptive kernels(?). > > > > > [<d29388b5>] hostap_get_wireless_stats+0xa6/0x2d6c77f1 [hostap] > > > > That's the dev->get_wireless_stats handler. I have assumed that it is > > allowed to sleep there, but apparently that is not the case with Linux > > 2.5.x (at least with CONFIG_PREEMPT). I added a workaround for this into > > Host AP CVS, but you will not get signal quality statistics in that > > case. I'll do a proper fix if that function is indeed not allowed to > > sleep (e.g., by collecting the statistics before and just copying the > > values here). > > > > Jean, do you have a comment on this? This happens, e.g., when executing > > 'cat /proc/net/wireless': > > > > > [<c0168f45>] seq_printf+0x45/0x56 > > > [<c02bd9b6>] wireless_seq_show+0xd6/0xf7 > > > [<c0141dd5>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x40e/0x6dc > > > [<c0168a56>] seq_read+0x1c9/0x2ee > > > [<c014d20f>] vfs_read+0xbc/0x127 > > > [<c014d496>] sys_read+0x3e/0x55 > > > [<c01093cb>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb > > I had an argument with David a few month ago on the subject > (you can ask him how it ended). I believe that it's not a good > practice to "schedule" in any of the ioctl, and that seem to also > apply to get_wireless_stats. On the other hand, you can perfectly take > a spinlock, disable irq and do your job.
Yes, this is because most of the device ioctl() calls are made with one or more spinlocks held by the network layer.
-- David Gibson | For every complex problem there is a david@gibson.dropbear.id.au | solution which is simple, neat and | wrong. http://www.ozlabs.org/people/dgibson - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |