Re: [PATCH/RFC] remove irqs_disabled warning from local_bh_enable

[Linus Torvalds]

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008, Johannes Berg wrote:
>
> This warning has started to trigger with mac80211 because it can, under
> some circumstances, use spin_lock_bh() protected sections within
> irq-disabled sections. Is that a bug?

Yes, it's a bug.

Why? Not because of the "spin_lock_bh()" itself, but because of the 
_unlock_, which does a "local_bh_enable_ip()", which in turn will check 
the whole "do_softirq()" if it was the last softirq_count.

And you must not do softirq's when hard-irq's were disabled!

So it should in theory be ok (but perhaps a bit odd) to do something like

	spin_lock_irq(&irq_lock);
	..do something..
	spin_lock_bh(&bh_lock);
	spin_unlock_irq(&irq_lock);
	.. do something else ..
	spin_unlock_bh(&bh_lock);

where the "spin_lock_bh()" itself is in an irq-locked context - as long as 
the "spin_unlock_bh()" is *not*.

See?

		Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/