Jarek Poplawski 94833dfb8c [NET] ifb: set separate lockdep classes for queue locks
[   10.536424] =======================================================
[   10.536424] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
[   10.536424] 2.6.25-rc3-devel #3
[   10.536424] -------------------------------------------------------
[   10.536424] swapper/0 is trying to acquire lock:
[   10.536424]  (&dev->queue_lock){-+..}, at: [<c0299b4a>] 
dev_queue_xmit+0x175/0x2f3
[   10.536424]
[   10.536424] but task is already holding lock:
[   10.536424]  (&p->tcfc_lock){-+..}, at: [<f8a67154>] tcf_mirred+0x20/0x178 
[act_mirred]
[   10.536424]
[   10.536424] which lock already depends on the new lock.

lockdep warns of locking order while using ifb with sch_ingress and
act_mirred: ingress_lock, tcfc_lock, queue_lock (usually queue_lock
is at the beginning). This patch is only to tell lockdep that ifb is
a different device (e.g. from eth) and has its own pair of queue
locks. (This warning is a false-positive in common scenario of using
ifb; yet there are possible situations, when this order could be
dangerous; lockdep should warn in such a case.) (With suggestions by
David S. Miller)

Reported-and-tested-by: Denys Fedoryshchenko <denys@visp.net.lb>
Signed-off-by: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@cyberus.ca>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2008-03-20 17:05:13 -07:00
..
2008-03-17 08:30:32 -04:00
2008-03-17 07:56:31 -04:00
2008-03-10 16:33:33 -07:00
2008-03-13 13:11:43 -07:00
2008-02-05 09:44:23 -08:00
2008-03-12 14:15:00 +01:00
2008-02-08 09:22:38 -08:00
2008-03-04 11:03:09 +02:00
2008-03-15 19:17:12 -07:00
2008-02-13 16:21:19 -08:00
2008-03-03 10:47:13 -08:00
2008-02-26 14:12:09 +09:00
2008-02-21 15:27:07 -08:00
2008-03-10 16:42:27 -07:00
2008-03-17 22:58:21 +11:00
2008-03-04 16:35:12 -08:00