Re: [PATCH 1/3] printk: Release console_sem after logbuf_lock

[Ingo Molnar]

* Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> >   => only a 'there be dragons' mental marker
> 
> Right, my reply was that I couldn't convince myself unlock order 
> could make a difference, but clearly I can easily have missed 
> something subtle.
> 
> > and i have to say that when i found a boot lockup during testing 
> > i was not surprised very much :)
> 
> But you found a lockup on the second patch, not this one.

Yeah, it's not like my mental markers are overly precise! ;-)

> Also, this patch is important for #3, where we want to take 
> logbuf_lock under the semaphore internal lock, that too would 
> preclude us doing that up() in the old location.

Yeah. I'm not against it or anything (hey i suggested the whole 
thing), but i'll be testing this through carefully.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/