Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 30 Jan 2017 18:41:33 +0300
From:      Andrew Rybchenko <arybchik@freebsd.org>
To:        Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>, Navdeep Parhar <nparhar@gmail.com>
Cc:        net@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: ifmedia status callback is non-sleepable
Message-ID:  <291ccad7-0ed6-0bff-031d-0d19c2b89d31@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20170127193723.GT2611@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <790a6da4-2492-d887-8cbc-d9737d3f07d1@freebsd.org> <20170127193723.GT2611@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Navdeep, Gleb,

On 01/27/2017 10:37 PM, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
>    Andrew,
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 08:24:43PM +0300, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> A> I'd like to double-check that it is intended/known limitation on ifmedia
> A> status callback to be non-sleepable.
> A> The limitation is imposed by usage of the ifmedia ioctl to get status
> A> from lacp/lagg code on port creation (it holds non-sleepable rm_wlock).
> A>
> A> Backtrace of the corresponding panic:
> A>
> A> Sleeping thread (tid 100578, pid 10653) owns a non-sleepable lock
> A> KDB: stack backtrace of thread 100578:
> A> #0 0xffffffff80ae46e2 at mi_switch+0xd2
> A> #1 0xffffffff80b31e6a at sleepq_wait+0x3a
> A> #2 0xffffffff80ae34e2 at _sx_xlock_hard+0x592
> A> #3 0xffffffff8222fd7e at sfxge_media_status+0x2e
> A> #4 0xffffffff80be7b90 at ifmedia_ioctl+0x170
> A> #5 0xffffffff8222c3d0 at sfxge_if_ioctl+0x1f0
> A> #6 0xffffffff82277fbe at lagg_port_ioctl+0xde
> A> #7 0xffffffff82278f9b at lacp_linkstate+0x4b
> A> #8 0xffffffff822794c2 at lacp_port_create+0x1e2
> A> #9 0xffffffff82276a73 at lagg_ioctl+0x1243
> A> #10 0xffffffff80bdcbec at ifioctl+0xfbc
> A> #11 0xffffffff80b41ab4 at kern_ioctl+0x2d4
> A> #12 0xffffffff80b41771 at sys_ioctl+0x171
> A> #13 0xffffffff80fa16ae at amd64_syscall+0x4ce
> A> #14 0xffffffff80f8442b at Xfast_syscall+0xfb
> A> panic: sleeping thread
> A> cpuid = 23
>
> I would say that this is bug in lagg(4). We shouldn't put constraint
> of non-sleepability for ioctl(2).

thanks a lot for replies. If so, what is the next step here? Should I 
submit a PR?

I can try to find time to fix it, but it highly depends on design and 
I'd be thankful if someone who knows it well suggests the design/idea.
Also I'm afraid i have very limited resources for testing any fixes in 
this area.

Andrew.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?291ccad7-0ed6-0bff-031d-0d19c2b89d31>