Re: netpoll trapped question

[Herbert Xu]

Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>> mpm> Yes, true. But we're still in trouble if we have nic irq handler ->
>> mpm> take private lock -> printk -> netconsole -> nic irq handler -> take
>> mpm> private lock. See?
>> 
>> Okay, so that one has to be addressed on a per-driver basis.  There's no
>> way for us to detect that situation.  And how do drivers address this?
>> Simply don't printk inside the lock?  I think that's reasonable.
> 
> Why not queue the message whenever you're in IRQ context, and only
> print when you are not?

Actually how can this happen at all? The IRQ handler should've disabled
local IRQs which prevents the second handler from occuring.
-- 
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/