[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CABE8wwsSwDDoBdAUkUggxTJAQd=xErRL=ryQojGePJGTMj5B6A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 18:52:27 -0800
From: "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the pm tree (and warning)
[ sorry I've been out of town... ]
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> Hello, Guennadi.
>
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:33:29AM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
>> No, this isn't a correct fix.
>
> I've been looking at the code and am scratching my head about what
> happens after timeout. If test timed out (tmo == 0), it prints out
> error message and continues to the next iteration of the test loop,
> which will reinitialize the on-stack completion. This essentially
> makes the previous test run's callback_param pointer dangling. The
> completion needs to be either detached from the callback or waited
> upon even if it timed out. Am I missing something?
If the completion times out then it is almost certainly a hardware or
driver bug. There is no facility to get a dma driver to forget a
queued operation. The test should probably abort at that point, but
it isn't intended to be a recoverable condition.
--
Dan
--
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