From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>,
Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Input: sysrq - drop tty argument from sysrq ops handlers
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 10:09:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100804100926.3f24f5e5@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1280910830.1902.144.camel@pasglop>
> I have a patch to drop the lock in serial_core.h, I'll post that
> tomorrow hopefully, just checking if there's any objection there ? The
Fundamentally - no. However the impact it has on a lot of the drivers
will be significant and you'll be submitting a huge patch pile to fix up
all the locking assumptions (for one it means port->tty might change
across any call that ends up in sysrq)
> serial drivers might need to be audited a bit to make sure they cope
> with the lock being dropped and re-acquired around the sysrq call.
Architecturally I think it would make more sense to add a new sysrq
helper which merely sets a flag, and check that flag at the end of the IRQ
when dropping the lock anyway.
Otherwise it'll be a huge amount of work to even build test all those
consoles.
Alan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-04 8:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-04 7:58 [PATCH 0/3] SysRq: do not pass tty argument around Dmitry Torokhov
2010-08-04 7:59 ` [PATCH 1/3] Input: sysrq - drop tty argument from sysrq ops handlers Dmitry Torokhov
2010-08-04 8:33 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-08-04 9:09 ` Alan Cox [this message]
2010-08-05 1:59 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-08-04 12:03 ` Jason Wessel
2010-08-05 2:03 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-08-04 7:59 ` [PATCH 2/3] Input: sysrq - drop tty argument form handle_sysrq() Dmitry Torokhov
2010-08-04 11:25 ` Jason Wessel
2010-08-04 7:59 ` [PATCH 3/3] USB: drop tty argument from usb_serial_handle_sysrq_char() Dmitry Torokhov
2010-08-04 11:25 ` Jason Wessel
2010-08-04 9:11 ` [PATCH 0/3] SysRq: do not pass tty argument around Alan Cox
2010-08-04 19:44 ` Greg KH
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100804100926.3f24f5e5@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--to=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=airlied@linux.ie \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=jason.wessel@windriver.com \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®