![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread Complete thread (EXPERIMENTAL) |
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008, Peter Zijlstra wrote: As to the regression reported by Marcin; what happens is that we invoke printk() while holding the xtime lock for writing. printk() will call wake_up_klogd() which tries to enqueue klogd on some rq. The known deadlock here is calling printk() while holding rq->lock, which would then try to recusively lock the rq again when trying to wake klogd. Ok. Right now, however, I think that for 2.6.25 I'll just remove the printk. And for the long haul, I really don't think the solution is "printk_nowakup()", because this is going to happen again when somebody doesn't realize the code is called with the rq lock held, and it's going to be a bitch to debug. I just don't think this is maintainable. Linus | ||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||
| Last update: 2008-03-24 19:03 [W:0.212 / U:0.070 seconds] ©2003-2005 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||