From: linas@austin.ibm.com
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: paulus@au1.ibm.com, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
linuxppc64-dev <linuxppc64-dev@lists.linuxppc.org>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] 2.6 PPC64: lockfix for rtas error log (third-times-a-charm?)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 15:31:20 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040630153120.W21634@forte.austin.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1088621248.1920.43.camel@gaston>; from benh@kernel.crashing.org on Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 01:47:29PM -0500
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 01:47:29PM -0500, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> > Well, the problem was that there is no lock that is protecting the
> > use of the single, global buffer. Adding yet another lock is bad;
> > it makes hunting for deadlocks that much more tedious and difficult;
> > already, finding deadlocks is error-prone, and subject to bit-rot as
> > future hackers update the code. So instead, the problem can be easily
> > avoided by not using a global buffer. The code below mallocs/frees.
> > Its not perf-critcal, so I don't mind malloc overhead. Would this
> > work for you? Patch attached below.
>
> I prefer that, but couldn't we move the kmalloc outside of the spinlock
> and so use GFP_KERNEL instead ?
OK,
Upon closer analysis of the code, I see that log_rtas_error()
was incorrectly named, and was being used incorrectly. The
solution is to get rid of it entirely; see patch below. So:
-- In one case kmalloc must be GFP_ATOMIC because rtas_call()
can happen in any context, incl. irqs.
-- In the other case, I turned it into GFP_KENREL, at the cost
of doing a needless malloc/free in the vast majority of
cases where there is no error. Small price, as I beleive
that this routine is very rarely called.
Patch below,
Signed-off-by: Linas Vepstas <linas@linas.org>
--linas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-07-01 0:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-29 22:50 [PATCH] PPC64: lockfix for rtas error log linas
2004-06-30 1:17 ` David Gibson
2004-06-30 16:58 ` linas
2004-06-30 1:44 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-06-30 17:36 ` linas
2004-06-30 18:47 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-06-30 19:02 ` Olof Johansson
2004-06-30 19:02 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-06-30 20:31 ` linas [this message]
2004-06-30 11:27 ` Paul Mackerras
2004-06-30 17:50 ` linas
2004-06-30 23:07 ` Paul Mackerras
2004-07-01 16:31 ` Jake Moilanen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-07-01 19:19 [PATCH] 2.6 PPC64: lockfix for rtas error log (third-times-a-charm?)] linas
2004-07-01 19:49 ` Dave Hansen
2004-07-01 20:31 ` linas
2004-07-01 20:39 ` Greg KH
2004-07-01 21:17 ` linas
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=20040630153120.W21634@forte.austin.ibm.com \
--to=linas@austin.ibm.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc64-dev@lists.linuxppc.org \
--cc=paulus@au1.ibm.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.