From: Weidong Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] BNX2: fix a Null Pointer for stats_blk Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 10:00:45 +0800 Message-ID: <5603594D.70408@huawei.com> References: <56014CC0.3050201@huawei.com> <20150923.153117.2291008783799112683.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: , , , , To: David Miller Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150923.153117.2291008783799112683.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 2015/9/24 6:31, David Miller wrote: > From: Weidong Wang > Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 20:42:40 +0800 > >> @@ -880,6 +882,7 @@ bnx2_alloc_mem(struct bnx2 *bp) >> } >> } >> >> + spin_lock(&bp->stats64_lock); >> bp->stats_blk = status_blk + status_blk_size; >> >> bp->stats_blk_mapping = bp->status_blk_mapping + status_blk_size; >> @@ -894,20 +897,23 @@ bnx2_alloc_mem(struct bnx2 *bp) >> &bp->ctx_blk_mapping[i], >> GFP_KERNEL); >> if (bp->ctx_blk[i] == NULL) >> - goto alloc_mem_err; >> + goto free_stats64_lock; >> } >> } >> >> err = bnx2_alloc_rx_mem(bp); >> if (err) >> - goto alloc_mem_err; >> + goto free_stats64_lock; > > You're holding a spinlock while doing GFP_KERNEL allocations. > hm, yep, I should move it after the allocations. Like this: @@ -880,7 +882,9 @@ bnx2_alloc_mem(struct bnx2 *bp) } } + spin_lock(&bp->stats64_lock); bp->stats_blk = status_blk + status_blk_size; + spin_unlock(&bp->stats64_lock); the allocations won't use the stats_blk, so I shouldn't hold the lock while doing allocations. > Second of all, taking a spinlock in get_stats64() defeats the whole > intention of making statistics acquisition as fast and as SMP scalable > as possible. > It does affect the intention. Although, the problem exists then makes the system panic within some case. Do you have any idea about it? Best Regards, Weidong > . >