[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110823220056.GK3895@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 23:00:56 +0100
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: try_to_freeze() called with IRQs disabled on ARM
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 11:53:42PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 11:51 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> >> and the boot runs very slowly. Reverting the series merged in 56f0be
> >> appears to resolve the issue,
> >
> > In fact, the patch from:
> >
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1083602/
> >
> > is sufficient to make the calltrace go away.
>
> Yes, that's true but the added might_sleep() discovered an actual bug
> here, so I still think it's better to keep it there.
>
> If proper fix is difficult, I think doing something like if
> (!in_atomic()) try_to_freeze() with big fat warning explaining what's
> broken and how it should be fixed should do it for now if the proper
> fix is gonna take some time. That way, we document what's broken where
> it's broken and get to keep the useful debugging annotation.
How does that solve it? IRQs disabled from assembly, which doesn't touch
the preempt counter.
--
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