[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <987664A83D2D224EAE907B061CE93D5301E9EC9DC6@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 10:57:28 -0700
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
CC: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] pstore: change mutex locking to spin_locks
> > Is it safe to call pstore_mkfile with IRQ disabled?
> >
> > pstore_mkfile -> d_alloc_name -> d_alloc -> kmem_cache_alloc(, GFP_KERNEL).
>
> Don't know. But would that mean we would have to put the pstore_mkfile
> on a workqueue then or something similar?
That might be a good idea anyway. In the "oops" case we'd like the file
to appear in the pstore filesystem if the system stayed healthy despite
the oops[1]. There isn't any reason why the pstore entry must appear instantly.
Delaying the creation would avoid running into problems related to the
oops.
-Tony
[1] So we can remove it to free pstore backend space - if we didn't die
from the oops, then the oops is going to be in /var/log/messages.
--
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