On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Don Lewis wrote: > If you are finding that you need to wire the order of if_addr_mtx, that > is a potential clue. The only lock I see taken after if_addr_mtx is > "UMA zone". If you are seeing other locks under if_addr_mtx, maybe one > of those is looping back to rtentry. I also see taskqueue, "if send > queue", and various memory subsystem locks under "network driver". > Both taskqueue and "if send queue" appear to be leaf locks. In the link layer multicast address code, I'm fairly careful not to hold if_addr_mtx over calls into the ifnet code. Three suspect points are the call to ifp->if_resolvemulti(), which looks like it is OK for all current implementations, and the call to rt_newmaddrmsg() in if_addmulti(), which is made before the unlock call so that the 'ifma' reference remains valid, and a similar call to rt_newmaddrmsg() in if_delmulti(). These calls should acquire only mbuf allocator and general allocator locks, and the netisr handoff mutex for NETISR_ROUTE. However, perhaps there's a case here I'm not seeing. It might be worth commenting out those two calls under if_addr_mtx and seeing if the lock order warning goes away. Robert N M WatsonReceived on Thu Sep 01 2005 - 00:41:21 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:42 UTC