On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 3:46 PM Philipp Rudo <prudo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2022 15:16:10 -0500
> Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 16 Nov 2022 19:56:24 +0000
> > "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > --- a/kernel/kexec_core.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/kexec_core.c
> > > @@ -1175,6 +1175,12 @@ int kernel_kexec(void)
> > > } else
> > > #endif
> > > {
> > > + error = freeze_processes();
> > > + if (error) {
> > > + error = -EBUSY;
> > > + goto Unlock;
> > > + }
> >
> > If this is the path of a kernel panic, do we really want to check the
> > return error of freeze_processes()? We are panicing, there's not much more
> > we can do.
>
> kernel_kexec isn't called during panic. We don't need to worry about it
> here.
Indeed, sorry for my hasty comment and for misleading Steve. This is
seen to happen when doing manual kexec from the reboot(2) system call.
During a regular panic, machine_shutdown() is not called so this would
not happen. However, for testing, the crash is a hurdle.
> Having that said I think this is a problem in the device driver _not_
> in kexec. In my opinion it's the job of the driver to prevent such
> races during shutdown.
Thanks a lot for your input. Rob, what do you think?
thanks,
- Joel
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
