[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B1722FD.3080807@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 11:31:25 +0900
From: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>
CC: mingo@...e.hu, stable@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mce: timer must be setup unconditionally
Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com> 02.12.09 09:47 >>>
>> Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> mce_timer must be passed to setup_timer() in all cases, no matter
>>> whether it is going to be actually used. Otherwise, when the CPU gets
>>> brought down, its call to del_timer_sync() will never return, as the
>>> timer won't have a base associated, and hence lock_timer_base() will
>>> loop infinitely.
>> No, what we need to fix is hotplug callbacks.
>> So correct fix should be like "del/add timer conditionally when hotplug."
>
> Why? This makes the logic just more complicated (you'd need to track
> whether the timer was ever setup or added), and I can't see any
> non-tolerable side effect of calling setup_timer() without ever adding
> the timer anywhere.
Ah, sorry, I mistook your patch.
It seems that I just found an another bug here...
Reviewed-by: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
Thanks,
H.Seto
--
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