[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87frn7wszd.ffs@tglx>
Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2024 12:19:34 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: "Farber, Eliav" <farbere@...zon.com>, "linux@...linux.org.uk"
<linux@...linux.org.uk>, "catalin.marinas@....com"
<catalin.marinas@....com>, "will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>,
"mpe@...erman.id.au" <mpe@...erman.id.au>, "npiggin@...il.com"
<npiggin@...il.com>, "christophe.leroy@...roup.eu"
<christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>, "naveen@...nel.org" <naveen@...nel.org>,
"maddy@...ux.ibm.com" <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>, "paul.walmsley@...ive.com"
<paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, "palmer@...belt.com" <palmer@...belt.com>,
"aou@...s.berkeley.edu" <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, "ebiederm@...ssion.com"
<ebiederm@...ssion.com>, "akpm@...ux-foundation.org"
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "bhe@...hat.com" <bhe@...hat.com>,
"hbathini@...ux.ibm.com" <hbathini@...ux.ibm.com>,
"sourabhjain@...ux.ibm.com" <sourabhjain@...ux.ibm.com>,
"adityag@...ux.ibm.com" <adityag@...ux.ibm.com>,
"songshuaishuai@...ylab.org" <songshuaishuai@...ylab.org>,
"takakura@...inux.co.jp" <takakura@...inux.co.jp>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org"
<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, "linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>, "kexec@...ts.infradead.org"
<kexec@...ts.infradead.org>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc: "Chocron, Jonathan" <jonnyc@...zon.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 1/2] kexec: Consolidate
machine_kexec_mask_interrupts() implementation
On Sat, Nov 30 2024 at 20:08, Eliav Farber wrote:
> On 11/29/2024 3:30 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> Looking deeper. This function actually cannot be called from this
>> context. It does:
>>
>> irq_get_desc_buslock(irq, &flags, 0);
>>
>> which means for any interrupt which has an actual buslock implementation
>> it will end up in a sleepable function and deadlock in the worst case.
>>
>> Marc?
> I will wait for Marc's response regarding this issue.
> Regardless, if any changes are required, I believe it would be better
> to address them in a separate patch, as this behavior existed before my
> modification.
Correct.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists