[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150915113003.GS21084@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 12:30:03 +0100
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
patches@...aro.org, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm: Fix backtrace generation when IPI is masked
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:05:12PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> Currently on ARM when <SysRq-L> is triggered from an interrupt handler
> (e.g. a SysRq issued using UART or kbd) the main CPU will wedge for ten
> seconds with interrupts masked before issuing a backtrace for every CPU
> except itself.
>
> The new backtrace code introduced by commit 96f0e00378d4 ("ARM: add
> basic support for on-demand backtrace of other CPUs") does not work
> correctly when run from an interrupt handler because IPI_CPU_BACKTRACE
> is used to generate the backtrace on all CPUs but cannot preempt the
> current calling context.
This patch needs a little more work - what happens to the IPI_CPU_BACKTRACE
we've sent to ourselves? (It fires after the interrupt handler for the
UART/kbd has finished.) It ought to be masked out if we're going to
handle it a different way.
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
--
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