Re: [PATCH 1/3] printk: Release console_sem after logbuf_lock

Ingo Molnar
2011-06-10T09:30:56Z

* Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote:

> > => only a 'there be dragons' mental marker
>
> Right, my reply was that I couldn't convince myself unlock order
> could make a difference, but clearly I can easily have missed
> something subtle.
>
> > and i have to say that when i found a boot lockup during testing
> > i was not surprised very much :)
>
> But you found a lockup on the second patch, not this one.

Yeah, it's not like my mental markers are overly precise! ;-)

> Also, this patch is important for #3, where we want to take
> logbuf_lock under the semaphore internal lock, that too would
> preclude us doing that up() in the old location.

Yeah. I'm not against it or anything (hey i suggested the whole
thing), but i'll be testing this through carefully.

Thanks,

Ingo