Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 28 Aug 2002 17:05:44 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [BUG] mysterious tty deadlock |
| |
Russell King wrote: > > ... > > --- 2.5.32/drivers/serial/core.c~serial-race Wed Aug 28 15:22:22 2002 > > +++ 2.5.32-akpm/drivers/serial/core.c Wed Aug 28 15:22:26 2002 > > @@ -1315,13 +1315,14 @@ static void uart_wait_until_sent(struct > > * 'timeout' / 'expire' give us the maximum amount of time > > * we wait. > > */ > > + set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); > > while (!port->ops->tx_empty(port)) { > > - set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); > > schedule_timeout(char_time); > > if (signal_pending(current)) > > break; > > if (time_after(jiffies, expire)) > > break; > > + set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); > > } > > set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING); /* might not be needed */ > > } > > Patch looks good, as far as correctness goes. However, since char_time > will be the amount of time for one character, we should never sleep long > enough for the user to notice this slip-up. > > If people are seeing deadlocks, I agree with wli that there's something > very wrong elsewhere.
Well Bill's trace is claiming that we're doing a schedule_timeout(0x7fffffff) for some reason.
But yes, he seems to be able to hit it too frequently for this to be the cause. - 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/
|  |