[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1201110185.13596.22.camel@imap.mvista.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 09:43:05 -0800
From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Tim Bird <tim.bird@...sony.com>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>,
John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/20 -v5] printk - dont wakeup klogd with interrupts
disabled
> if (wake_klogd && !runqueue_is_locked())
> wake_up_klogd();
>
> This probably is the cleanest solution since it simply prevents the
> deadlock from occurring.
Do you really need to call it with the runqueue lock held .. There are
other issue with the calls at that level.. For instance in -rt these
call can actually hang the system in the console laying from inside
printk (something I reported more than 6 months ago) .. It would be
better to move them around the scheduler rather than inside it..
Daniel
--
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