lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] x86: Don't recursively acquire rtc_lock

* Matt Fleming <matt@console-pimps.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 17:17 +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > (Adding Jan and Avi, apparently git send-email doesn't grok Acked-by's)
> >
> > On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 17:12 +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > > From: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@intel.com>
> > >
> > > A deadlock was introduced on x86 in commit ef68c8f87ed1 ("x86:
> > > Serialize EFI time accesses on rtc_lock") because efi_get_time() and
> > > friends can be called with rtc_lock already held by
> > > read_persistent_time(), e.g.
> > >
> > > timekeeping_init()
> > > read_persistent_clock() <-- acquire rtc_lock
> > > efi_get_time()
> > > phys_efi_get_time() <-- acquire rtc_lock <DEADLOCK>
> > >
> > > To fix this let's push the locking down into the get_wallclock() and
> > > set_wallclock() implementations. Only the clock implementations that
> > > access the x86 RTC directly need to acquire rtc_lock, so it makes
> > > sense to push the locking down into the rtc, vrtc and efi code.
> > >
> > > The virtualization implementations don't require rtc_lock to be held
> > > because they provide their own serialization.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@intel.com>
> > > Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>
> > > Acked-by: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> [for the virtualization aspect]
>
> Ping? It's -rc8 and 32-bit EFI machines still don't boot.

Don't know the status of this - Thomas?

Thanks,

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-10-10 08:49    [W:0.080 / U:3.716 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site