[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <460955CC.70006@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 13:35:08 -0400
From: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
clalance@...hat.com, mingo@...hat.com, davej@...hat.com,
Thilo.Cestonaro.external@...itsu-siemens.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Fix bogus softlockup warning with sysrq-t
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
> diff -r 4c81d8cafb67 drivers/char/sysrq.c
> --- a/drivers/char/sysrq.c Tue Mar 27 01:16:07 2007 -0700
> +++ b/drivers/char/sysrq.c Tue Mar 27 01:18:05 2007 -0700
> @@ -408,6 +408,8 @@ void __handle_sysrq(int key, struct tty_
> int i;
> unsigned long flags;
>
> + softlockup_global_disable();
> +
> spin_lock_irqsave(&sysrq_key_table_lock, flags);
> orig_log_level = console_loglevel;
> console_loglevel = 7;
> @@ -445,6 +447,8 @@ void __handle_sysrq(int key, struct tty_
> console_loglevel = orig_log_level;
> }
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sysrq_key_table_lock, flags);
> +
> + softlockup_global_enable();
> }
>
>
I wonder if that's too strong of a fix. It's only the sysrq-t case that
is the problem. AFAIK, none of the other sysrq-t operations hold the
tasklist_lock for a long time. I'd move these around show_state.
P.
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists