From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2012 11:27:20 -0700 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: [PATCH 25/69] TTY: con3215, remove tasklet for tty_wakeup Message-ID: <20120409182720.GA12044@kroah.com> References: <1333367693-3244-1-git-send-email-jslaby@suse.cz> <1333367693-3244-26-git-send-email-jslaby@suse.cz> <20120403054241.GA2700@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <4F7AADD7.5070802@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F7AADD7.5070802@suse.cz> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Archive: List-Post: To: Jiri Slaby Cc: Heiko Carstens , alan@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jirislaby@gmail.com, Martin Schwidefsky , linux390@de.ibm.com, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:59:19AM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote: > On 04/03/2012 07:42 AM, Heiko Carstens wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 01:54:09PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote: > >> tty_wakeup is safe to be called from all contexts. No need to schedule > >> a tasklet for that. Let us call it directly like in other drivers. > >> > >> And delete the tasklet completely. > > > > Your patch actually reverts Martin's recent commit 656d912537 > > "[S390] 3215 deadlock with tty_wakeup". > > I'm quite sure the reason for the deadlock still exists. > > Unfortunately the commit doesn't contain the call chain that > > led to fix. > > Ok, I would really appreciate the trace. > > If this is really an issue, we should provide a helper in the TTY layer > like tty_schedule_wakeup. Jiri, should I not apply this patch? thanks, greg k-h