On Tue 08-10-19 15:42:56, Petr Mladek wrote: [...] > I am not -mm maintainer so I could not guarantee that a patch > using printk_deferred() will get accepted. But it will have much > bigger chance than the original patch. I am not going to ack any such patch until it is clear what is the actual problem. The disucssion in this thread boils down to point to lockdep splats which are most likely false possitives and there is no clear evidence that the is any actual deadlock as those would be clearly identifiable if the zone->lock or any other spinlock spinlock were participating. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
