lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [May]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 2.6.21-rc7: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at net/core/sock.c:1523
Hi Jiri,

On 5/16/07, Jiri Kosina <jikos@jikos.cz> wrote:
> On Fri, 11 May 2007, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> > (later)
> > I Googled a bit to see if this problem was faced elsewhere in the kernel
> > too. Saw the following commit by Ingo Molnar
> > (9883a13c72dbf8c518814b6091019643cdb34429):
> > - lock_sock(sock->sk);
> > + local_bh_disable();
> > + bh_lock_sock_nested(sock->sk);
> > rc = selinux_netlbl_socket_setsid(sock, sksec->sid);
> > - release_sock(sock->sk);
> > + bh_unlock_sock(sock->sk);
> > + local_bh_enable();
> > Is it _really_ *this* simple?
> [...]
> actually this *seems* to be proper solution also for our case, thanks for
> pointing this out. I will think about it once again, do some more tests
> with this locking scheme, and will let you know.

Yes, I can almost confirm that this (open-coding of spin_lock_bh,
effectively) is the proper solution (Rusty's unreliable guide to
kernel-locking needs to be next to every developer's keyboard :-)
I also came across this idiom in other places in the networking code
so it seems to be pretty much the standard way. I wish I owned
bluetooth hardware, could've tested this for you myself.

Thanks,
Satyam
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-05-16 13:39    [W:0.108 / U:1.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site