![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
* Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> wrote:
> > Badness in __mutex_trylock_slowpath at kernel/mutex.c:281
> >
> > Call Trace: <IRQ> <ffffffff80148d8d>{mutex_trylock+141}
> >
> > <ffffffff880abaf0>{:ohci_hcd:ohci_hub_status_data+480}
> > <ffffffff802d25d0>{rh_timer_func+0} <ffffffff802d24c3>{usb_hcd_poll_rh_status+67}
> > <ffffffff802d25d0>{rh_timer_func+0} <ffffffff802d25d9>{rh_timer_func+9}
> > <ffffffff8013a3cc>{run_timer_softirq+396}
> err, taking a mutex from softirq context.
btw., i'm wondering how the down_trylock() can be correct code: what
guarantees progress if the trylock happens to fail all the time? (or
just happens to fail frequently, due to some other, unrelated dev->mutex
workload)
Shouldnt this code use some other solution to process these timed events
more robustly?
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-01-16 09:24 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||