On Mon, 24 Mar 2008, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Fri, 21 Mar 2008, Hiroshi Shimamoto wrote: > > > > > > > > Is this a bug in mainline? The !PREEMPT_RT case should be as close to > > > mainline as possible, with no actual changes in object code. If this is > > > not the case, then we need to fix that. > > > > No, this issue is in -rt only. > > > > Hi Hiroshi, > > Thanks again for reporting this. I took a deeper look into this today and > came to the conclusion that we need to get rid of both > slab_irq_disable_nort and slab_irq_disable_rt, and simply use > slab_irq_disable ;-) > > This is what you patch indirectly does. I'll write up another patch to fix > this. > Actually, I'm going to take your patch. Seems that the reason Ingo did the two separate, is that the functions called also call the slab_irq_save, which will retake the locks in PREEMPT_RT. If we don't release the lock, then we can deadlock. Thanks, -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
