Re: traceback on 3.2.7-rt13

John Kacur
2012-03-02T11:29:21Z

On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Mar 2012, John Kacur wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>> > That's why I asked to revert the
>> >
>> >       acpi-make-gbl-hardware-lock-raw.patch
>> >       acpi-make-ec-lock-raw-as-well.patch
>> >
>> > patches, so we can get that information.
>> >
>> > It might be a non issue on 3.2 and only a 3.0 problem, but as I can't
>> > find anything I'm going to drop those patches from the next 3.2
>> > release and wait for proper bugreports coming again :)
>> >
>>
>> FWIW
>> I believe the latter comes from here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/12/3/53
>
> And how does that help? I know that the ec lock conversion was a
> follow up to the gbl hardware lock conversion, but I need to see the
> backtrace again which made us convert gbl lock.
>

So, if I can read between the lines here, you're saying the posted
traceback in the ml link wouldn't occur without the the gbl lock?
Unfortunately I don't think the original backtrace was posted on the
ml, otherwise somebody could have hunted it down. Ok, FWIW turned out
to be not much.

John
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html