From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268814AbUHLVma (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Aug 2004 17:42:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268825AbUHLVmB (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Aug 2004 17:42:01 -0400 Received: from alhambra.mulix.org ([192.117.103.203]:29828 "EHLO granada.merseine.nu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268576AbUHLVij (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Aug 2004 17:38:39 -0400 Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:39:36 +0300 From: Muli Ben-Yehuda To: Jeff Moyer Cc: Matt Mackall , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Stelian Pop , jgarzik@pobox.com Subject: Re: [patch] fix netconsole hang with alt-sysrq-t Message-ID: <20040812213936.GC17907@granada.merseine.nu> References: <16659.56343.686372.724218@segfault.boston.redhat.com> <20040806195237.GC16310@waste.org> <16659.58271.979999.616045@segfault.boston.redhat.com> <20040806202649.GE16310@waste.org> <16667.55966.317888.504243@segfault.boston.redhat.com> <20040812211841.GB17907@granada.merseine.nu> <16667.57829.212177.183803@segfault.boston.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="S1BNGpv0yoYahz37" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <16667.57829.212177.183803@segfault.boston.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040803i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --S1BNGpv0yoYahz37 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 05:32:21PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote: > =3D=3D> Regarding Re: [patch] fix netconsole hang with alt-sysrq-t; Muli = Ben-Yehuda adds: >=20 > mulix> On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 05:01:18PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote: > >> So how do you want to deal with this case? We could do something like: > >>=20 > >> int cpu =3D smp_processor_id(); >=20 > mulix> That doesn't look right, unless I'm missing something, you could g= et > mulix> preempted here (between the smp_processor_id() and the > mulix> local_irq_save() and end up with 'cpu' pointing to the wrong CPU. >=20 > Would a preempt_disable() be too hideous? Other suggestions? Maybe, but we could hide it in get_cpu() / put_cpu() ;-) Cheers,=20 Muli --=20 Muli Ben-Yehuda http://www.mulix.org | http://mulix.livejournal.com/ --S1BNGpv0yoYahz37 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBG+OYKRs727/VN8sRAmvdAJ9mDpAxd7kU64UBco1FSDMC5dHRpwCgo4Co iL/k4KcgFhKhokkJsyof/iM= =aTPj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --S1BNGpv0yoYahz37--