[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <hvc-console-29-3@bga.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2009 06:12:58 -0600
From: Milton Miller <miltonm@....com>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Benjiman Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
cc: linuxppc-dev list <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Joe Peterson <joe@...rush.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: [PATCH 0/5] hvc_console updates was Re: [BUG] hvc_console WARN() on current upstream
Alan Cox wrote:
> Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>> Seems that we are in interrupt, doing hvc_poll, which does
>> tty_flip_buffer_push
>
>Which means that someone has tty->low_latency set and is calling
>tty_flip_buffer_push in an IRQ. That has never been allowed or safe, and
>now it hurts ;)
>
>/**
> * tty_flip_buffer_push - terminal
> * @tty: tty to push
> *
> * Queue a push of the terminal flip buffers to the line discipline.
>This
> * function must not be called from IRQ context if tty->low_latency
>is set *
> * In the event of the queue being busy for flipping the work will be
> * held off and retried later.
> *
> * Locking: tty buffer lock. Driver locks in low latency mode.
> */
>
>
>That comment has been there for some years in varying formats
>
I actually was preparing a patch for this problem after I had encountered
the a deadlock due to this. That is in the first patch. I then found
and made a few more cleanups, although I might have reordered the rest.
The history for setting low_latency is in the changelog of the first patch..
milton
--
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