[lkml]   [2006]   [May]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Unnecessary warnings in smp_send_stop on i386 arch.
    On Tuesday 16 May 2006 9:56 pm, Keith Owens wrote:
    > Drew Moseley (on Tue, 16 May 2006 19:43:05 -0700) wrote:
    > >
    > >I modified the i386/kernel/smp.c file to be functionally equivalent to the
    > >x86_64/kernel/smp.c file to address this issue.
    > >
    > NAK this patch. There is a real potential deadlock if you call
    > smp_call_function() with interrupts disabled, it has caused kernel
    > hangs in the past. This patch removes the check for the potential
    > deadlock and will allow bad code to creep back into the kernel. See
    > I find it quite disturbing that
    > x86_64 has removed that check :(

    So presumably the warn_on() call should be added back to the x86_64 arch?
    Does that mean that the comment in the current code
    * You must not call this function with disabled interrupts or from a
    * hardware interrupt handler or from a bottom half handler.
    * Actually there are a few legal cases, like panic.
    is incorrect?

    I did manage to find this thread;; which
    seems related..

    Does is sound reasonable then to call local_irq_enable() for the scenarios
    where this will occur? Specifically, any call to smp_send_stop() where IRQ's
    might be disabled may need that call to eliminate the deadlock opportunity.
    Or am I just plain confused?

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-05-17 20:37    [W:0.020 / U:0.176 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site