From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758656AbZDOKCv (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2009 06:02:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753183AbZDOKCl (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2009 06:02:41 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:36105 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751644AbZDOKCl (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2009 06:02:41 -0400 Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 12:01:05 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Andrew Morton , Thomas Gleixner Cc: Yinghai Lu , rusty@rustcorp.com.au, tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, ebiederm@xmission.com, garyhade@us.ibm.com, lcm@us.ibm.com, venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] irq: correct CPUMASKS_OFFSTACK typo -v2 Message-ID: <20090415100105.GC6669@elte.hu> References: <20090402013108.GB7103@us.ibm.com> <20090404003520.GA8847@us.ibm.com> <20090410215515.GC7242@us.ibm.com> <20090411065510.GA11799@elte.hu> <20090413220321.GA11098@us.ibm.com> <49E4146C.7060507@kernel.org> <49E4162A.3060701@kernel.org> <20090414131711.GA4403@elte.hu> <49E4F513.1060709@kernel.org> <20090414135958.36c79836.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090414135958.36c79836.akpm@linux-foundation.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:41:55 -0700 > Yinghai Lu wrote: > > > irq > > Speaking of which, could someone please take a look at > http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/1060580?do=post_view_threaded#1060580 > ? [...] > But try_one_irq() is running tifm_7xx1_isr() with local interrupts > enabled, which upsets lockdep. It doesnt just upset lockdep, it could also cause real lockups. Lockdep is just the canary, the lockup is the methane explosion. > But I suspect that the code as it stands is non-buggy. Unless the > interrupt can magically come back to life. In which case any > change we make is purely a make-lockdep-shut-up thing. Hm, i'd suggest we go for the methane leak instead of squashing the canary. Which in this case would be try_one_irq() ignoring IRQF_DISABLED or so? Affecting (much) more ISRs than just tifm_7xx1_isr()? Thomas? Ingo