Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 29 Jul 1998 17:25:18 -0700 (PDT) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: Corruption Stats: Suggested Blacklist from the data |
| |
On Thu, 30 Jul 1998, MOLNAR Ingo wrote: > > there is a difference, back half a year i had some very rare lockups > occuring when some (buggy) code did a lock_kernel() with IRQs turned off. > (this might block a pending APIC irq, typically it was the timer > interrupt, and if another CPU is waiting for jiffies to increase, we were > cooked.)
Good call. Checking that local interrupts were enabled when trying to get the kernel lock was _not_ one of the sanity checks I had (I was checking the sanity of the lock itself, rather than checking the sanity of the caller).
I'm compiling the kernel with an added test right now - that would certainly have explained some problems. Trying to get the kernel lock with interrupts off is a rather bad idea,
Linus
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
| |