Re: [PATCH 0/2] printk vs rq->lock and xtime lock

[Linus Torvalds]

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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/