On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 1:38 AM Kalle Valo wrote:
>
> "Coelho, Luciano" writes:
>
> > On Tue, 2021-03-02 at 11:34 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> >> From: Jiri Kosina
> >>
> >> We can't call netif_napi_add() with rxq-lock held, as there is a potential
> >> for deadlock as spotted by lockdep (see belo
On Wed, 3 Mar 2021, Kalle Valo wrote:
> > ... i believe you want to drop the "(was ...") part from the patch
> > subject.
>
> Too late now, it's already applied and pull request sent. Why was it
> there in the first place?
Yeah, it was, but I don't think it's a big issue :) So let it be.
BTW,
Jiri Kosina writes:
> On Wed, 3 Mar 2021, Kalle Valo wrote:
>
>> Patch applied to wireless-drivers.git, thanks.
>
> Thanks, but ...
>
>> 295d4cd82b01 iwlwifi: don't call netif_napi_add() with rxq->lock
>> held (was Re: Lockdep warning in iwl_pcie_rx_handle())
>
> ... i believe you want to drop th
On Wed, 3 Mar 2021, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Patch applied to wireless-drivers.git, thanks.
Thanks, but ...
> 295d4cd82b01 iwlwifi: don't call netif_napi_add() with rxq->lock held (was
> Re: Lockdep warning in iwl_pcie_rx_handle())
... i believe you want to drop the "(was ...") part from the patch
Jiri Kosina wrote:
> From: Jiri Kosina
>
> We can't call netif_napi_add() with rxq-lock held, as there is a potential
> for deadlock as spotted by lockdep (see below). rxq->lock is not
> protecting anything over the netif_napi_add() codepath anyway, so let's
> drop it just before calling into N
On Tue, 2 Mar 2021, Kalle Valo wrote:
> > Thanks, Jiri! Let's take your patch since you already sent it out.
> >
> > Kalle, can you please take this directly to wireless-drivers.git?
> >
> > Acked-by: Luca Coelho
>
> Ok but I don't see this either in patchwork or lore, hopefully it shows
> up la
"Coelho, Luciano" writes:
> On Tue, 2021-03-02 at 11:34 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
>> From: Jiri Kosina
>>
>> We can't call netif_napi_add() with rxq-lock held, as there is a potential
>> for deadlock as spotted by lockdep (see below). rxq->lock is not
>> protecting anything over the netif_napi_
On Tue, 2021-03-02 at 11:34 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> From: Jiri Kosina
>
> We can't call netif_napi_add() with rxq-lock held, as there is a potential
> for deadlock as spotted by lockdep (see below). rxq->lock is not
> protecting anything over the netif_napi_add() codepath anyway, so let's
> d
From: Jiri Kosina
We can't call netif_napi_add() with rxq-lock held, as there is a potential
for deadlock as spotted by lockdep (see below). rxq->lock is not
protecting anything over the netif_napi_add() codepath anyway, so let's
drop it just before calling into NAPI.
==
9 matches
Mail list logo