linux-kernel - Re: Spinlock debugging

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 11 Sep 2006 17:38:21 +0100
From:	Andrew Bird <ajb@...eresystems.co.uk>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Spinlock debugging

Alan
	Yes, I have low_latency set for kernels lower than 2.6.17. I'm currently 
testing using 2.6.15. When you mention 'write method for flow control' do you 
mean for software XON/XOFF etc?
	On a more generic note, is the spinlock debug output read as a stack and what 
do the '=======' line breaks signify, looping?

Thanks


Andrew

On Monday 11 September 2006 17:36, Alan Cox wrote:
> Ar Llu, 2006-09-11 am 16:32 +0100, ysgrifennodd Andrew Bird (Sphere
>
> Systems):
> > will be lost. But if I comment out the line that tells the tty layer that
> > it's implemented, I end up with a BUG - spinlock recursion. Can anybody
> > tell me how to interpret the output?
>
> Looks like your driver calls flush_to_ldisc with low latency set and
> then can't handle the flush_to_ldisc causing n_tty to call back into the
> write method for flow control.
>
> Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/