From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1755217AbYGVXEY@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755217AbYGVXEY (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:04:24 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753260AbYGVXEK
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:04:10 -0400
Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:60027
	"EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753196AbYGVXEJ (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:04:09 -0400
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:04:09 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <20080722.160409.216536011.davem@davemloft.net>
To: Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net
Cc: kaber@trash.net, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
       netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Kernel WARNING: at net/core/dev.c:1330
 __netif_schedule+0x2c/0x98()
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
In-Reply-To: <4886294C.4060905@lwfinger.net>
References: <48860D4B.8070003@lwfinger.net>
	<488616C0.8070505@trash.net>
	<4886294C.4060905@lwfinger.net>
X-Mailer: Mew version 5.2 on Emacs 22.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

From: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 13:39:08 -0500

> =============================================
> [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> 2.6.26-Linus-05752-g93ded9b-dirty #53
> ---------------------------------------------
> b43/1997 is trying to acquire lock:
>   (_xmit_IEEE80211#2){-...}, at: [<ffffffffa028f322>] 
> ieee80211_scan_completed+0x130/0x2e1 [mac80211]
> 
> but task is already holding lock:
>   (_xmit_IEEE80211#2){-...}, at: [<ffffffffa028f322>] 
> ieee80211_scan_completed+0x130/0x2e1 [mac80211]
> 
> other info that might help us debug this:
> 3 locks held by b43/1997:
>   #0:  ((name)){--..}, at: [<ffffffff80245185>] run_workqueue+0xa7/0x1f2
>   #1:  (&(&local->scan_work)->work){--..}, at: [<ffffffff80245185>] 
> run_workqueue+0xa7/0x1f2
>   #2:  (_xmit_IEEE80211#2){-...}, at: [<ffffffffa028f322>] 
> ieee80211_scan_completed+0x130/0x2e1 [mac80211]
> 
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 1997, comm: b43 Not tainted 2.6.26-Linus-05752-g93ded9b-dirty #53
> 
> Call Trace:
>   [<ffffffff80255616>] __lock_acquire+0xb7b/0xecc
>   [<ffffffff8040c9a0>] __mutex_unlock_slowpath+0x100/0x10b
>   [<ffffffff802559b8>] lock_acquire+0x51/0x6a
>   [<ffffffffa028f322>] ieee80211_scan_completed+0x130/0x2e1 [mac80211]
>   [<ffffffff8040dc08>] _spin_lock+0x1e/0x27
>   [<ffffffffa028f322>] ieee80211_scan_completed+0x130/0x2e1 [mac80211]
>   [<ffffffffa028f6ce>] ieee80211_sta_scan_work+0x0/0x1b8 [mac80211]
>   [<ffffffff802451ce>] run_workqueue+0xf0/0x1f2
>   [<ffffffff802453ab>] worker_thread+0xdb/0xea
>   [<ffffffff80248a5f>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2e
>   [<ffffffff802452d0>] worker_thread+0x0/0xea
>   [<ffffffff80248731>] kthread+0x47/0x73
>   [<ffffffff8040d7b1>] trace_hardirqs_on_thunk+0x3a/0x3f
>   [<ffffffff8020ceb9>] child_rip+0xa/0x11
>   [<ffffffff8020c4ef>] restore_args+0x0/0x30
>   [<ffffffff802486c5>] kthreadd+0x19a/0x1bf
>   [<ffffffff802486ea>] kthread+0x0/0x73
>   [<ffffffff8020ceaf>] child_rip+0x0/0x11

Lockdep doesn't like that we have an array of objects (the TX queues)
and we're iterating over them grabbing all of their locks.

Does anyone know how to teach lockdep that this is OK?