* Steven Rostedt (rostedt@goodmis.org) wrote:
quoted text
> 
> On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Daniel Walker wrote:
> 
> >
> > On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 11:02 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > > +	if (!irqs_disabled() && wake_klogd)
> > >  		wake_up_klogd();
> >
> > This causes a regression .. When printk is called during an OOPS in
> > kernels without this change then the OOPS will get logged, since the
> > logging process (klogd) is woken to handle the messages.. If you apply
> > this change klogd doesn't wakeup, and hence doesn't log the oops.. So if
> > you remove the wakeup here you have to add it someplace else to maintain
> > the logging ..
> >
> > (I'm not theorizing here, I have defects logged against this specific
> > piece of code..)
> 
> It wont get woken up anyway. Did you look at wake_up_klogd?
> 
> void wake_up_klogd(void)
> {
> 	if (!oops_in_progress && waitqueue_active(&log_wait))
> 		wake_up_interruptible(&log_wait);
> }
> 
> 
> So if oops_in_progress is set, then it still wont get woken. Perhaps it
> got woken some other way? Or is oops_in_progress not set in these oops?
> 
> One other solution is to make the runqueue locks visible externally. Like:
> 
> in sched.c:
> 
> int runqueue_is_locked(void)
> {
> 	int cpu = get_cpu();
> 	struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> 	int ret;
> 
> 	ret = spin_is_locked(&rq->lock);
> 	put_cpu();
> 	return ret;
> }
> 
> And in printk we could do:
> 
> 	if (wake_klogd && !runqueue_is_locked())
> 		wake_up_klogd();
> 
> This probably is the cleanest solution since it simply prevents the
> deadlock from occurring.
> 


FYI :

kernel/panic.c

NORET_TYPE void panic(const char * fmt, ...)
{
....
bust_spinlocks(1);
...
bust_spinlocks(0);
...

In bust_spinlocks :


void __attribute__((weak)) bust_spinlocks(int yes)
{
        if (yes) {
                ++oops_in_progress;
        } else {
#ifdef CONFIG_VT
                unblank_screen();
#endif
                if (--oops_in_progress == 0)
                        wake_up_klogd();
        }
}

Where the final wake_up happens while oops_in_progress is 0, but
interrupts are still disabled.

So about my previous email, proposing testing oops_in_progress, it just
won't work.

Mathieu

quoted text
> -- Steve
> 

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/