Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] 2.4.16 kernel/printk.c (per processor initialization check) | From | j-nomura@ce ... | Date | Mon, 03 Dec 2001 19:32:35 +0900 |
| |
Hi,
Thank you for commenting.
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au> Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.4.16 kernel/printk.c (per processor initialization check) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 01:20:28 -0800
> Seems that there is some sort of ordering problem here - someone > is calling printk before the MMU is initialised, but after some > console drivers have been installed.
Yes. Because smp_init() is later in place than console_init(), printk() can be called in such a situation. For example, in IA-64, identify_cpu() is called before ia64_mmu_init(), while identify_cpu() calls printk() in it. I don't think the ordering itself is a problem.
> I suspect the real fix is elsewhere, but I'm not sure where. > > Probably a clearer place to put this test would be within > printk itself, immediately before the down_trylock. Does that > work?
The reason I put it in release_console_sem() is that release_console_sem() can be called from other functions than printk(), e.g. console_unblank(). I agree with you that it is clearer but I think it is not sufficient.
Best regards. -- NOMURA, Jun'ichi <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com, nomura@hpc.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp> HPC Operating System Group, 1st Computers Software Division, Computers Software Operations Unit, NEC Solutions. - 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/
| |