lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateTue, 23 Jun 2009 18:58:43 +0200 (CEST)
FromThomas Gleixner <>
SubjectRe: kerneloops.org report for the week of June 14 2009
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> The long term solution for the issue at hand is to clean up the suspend-resume
> support in cpufreq so that it doesn't do stupid things like calling
> smp_call_function_single() with interrupts disabled, but that requires someone
> (I can do it, but I need to dig through the cpufreq code for this purpose) to
> figure out how to fix it.
>
> I'm not quite sure if there's an acceptable short term solution, though.
>
> In principle we can do
>
> local_irq_save()
> ...
> local_irq_restore()
>
> around each sysdevs ->susend() and ->resume() in addition to checking the
> status of interrupts. Would that work?

Well not really, if the function enables interrupts you run into the
same issue (interrupt service routine calls ktime_get()) again.

Thanks,

tglx


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-23 19:03    [from the cache]
©2003-2010