[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51364B31.1010808@suse.cz>
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2013 20:44:49 +0100
From: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: WARNING at tty_buffer.c:428 process_one_work()
On 03/05/2013 08:39 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
> Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2013 12:01:06 +0100
>
>> I left that "if (port->start == NULL)" in sunhv in place because it
>> behaves completely differently. It checks port->start on all paths prior
>> dereferencing it. And it does not stop interrupts on ->shutdown.
>
> But this code really does care if a TTY is attached, because it wants
> to make sure that SYSRQ handling occurs unconditionally, even if there
> is no TTY to queue the characters to.
>
> This is critically important during bootup before the initial shell
> is spawned, if you want to do a SYSRQ register dump or reset out of
> a hung boot.
>
> Whether that test is now ->state == NULL or whatever, the same logic
> still needs to exist in all of these places.
Hi, I must admit I don't understand. I now checked both of them and they
call uart_handle_sysrq_char unconditionally, or?
--
js
suse labs
--
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