Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 10326] New: inconsistent lock state in net_rx_action

From: Jarek Poplawski <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 11:07:00 +0100

On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 02:18:12AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
...
> Anyway, the accusation is that lockdep is busted, in that it doesn't realise that
> local_irq_disable() blocks softirqs.

Usually lockdep gets this right, so I've some doubts too. But here
it's not only about softirqs; this:

> >> Mar 25 19:48:46 better kernel:  #1:  (target_list_lock){--..}, at: [<c0399c0d>]

means lockdep saw hardirqs enabled while acquiring/holding this lock.

Jarek P.