From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750983AbWFELd1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jun 2006 07:33:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750985AbWFELd0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jun 2006 07:33:26 -0400 Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.224]:9652 "EHLO wr-out-0506.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750982AbWFELd0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jun 2006 07:33:26 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=QAKIEovh/rBImmi1CKVefWhFjpUwGAakQXMHdFqLDUpe3JewKSKtahGfZlv6EC2ovgechYTQDWbKisiBkFhr7O1tNXZ8Jyxqva/KsikGCgSVgnK26rm+jQU+MompE8K27K2TRlJPnfpQHoI+UVXPoe/guHaZ2DYe4RWYwZgq0M4= Message-ID: <6bffcb0e0606050433i1261d3e4sd0d958fb15208596@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 13:33:25 +0200 From: "Michal Piotrowski" To: "Ingo Molnar" Subject: Re: [patch, -rc5-mm3] fix IDE deadlock in error reporting code Cc: "Andrew Morton" , "Arjan van de Ven" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20060605083530.GA31738@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060603232004.68c4e1e3.akpm@osdl.org> <986ed62e0606040238t712d7b01xde5f4a23da12fb1a@mail.gmail.com> <20060604024937.0fb57258.akpm@osdl.org> <6bffcb0e0606040308j28d9e89axa0136908c5530ae3@mail.gmail.com> <20060604104121.GA16117@elte.hu> <6bffcb0e0606040407u4f56f7fdyf5ec479314afc082@mail.gmail.com> <20060604213803.GC5898@elte.hu> <6bffcb0e0606041535u10fdb7c2o9ac38d6fb80fd28d@mail.gmail.com> <20060605083016.GA31013@elte.hu> <20060605083530.GA31738@elte.hu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 05/06/06, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > ah. That's a real deadlock scenario. Does the patch below fix it? If > > yes then i think this is a candidate for 2.6.17 merging too. > > actually, the replacement patch below is better i think - it moves the > ide_lock taking to outside the printing section. That should still be OK > as we dont call other functions from within the section, and it should > also result in slightly more robust printing, as the whole printing code > will be atomic under ide_lock. Probably fixed, thanks. > > Ingo > Regards, Michal -- Michal K. K. Piotrowski LTG - Linux Testers Group (http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/ltg/wiki/)