Hello!
> that takes care of this). I can see that Alexey commented in
> the code that he also got his machine to hard lock but I cannot
> tell from his context whether it was because of using lock_sock
> or the current version which uses SOCKHASH_LOCK() (which
> translates into a start_bh_atomic()).
It is Andi's comment and this commnet is wrong.
lock_sock() is completely inappropriate for proc.
Locking looks correct there, probably algorithm itself is wrong
(stack overrun or something similar).
I cannot reproduced this lockup.
Why not to try sysreq-p to look where it looped?
Alexey
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
