On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 12:44:55AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Aug 2007 00:24:37 -0700 Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Andrew, I really don't want to change the PCI core to handle this, as we
> > > finally fixed a lot of issues with drivers trying to walk these lists
> > > from interrupt context. So if you want to just hide the warning message
> > > as we are shutting down, that's fine with me. Or just don't do the
> > > fixups. But grabbing a reference to the pci device is unsafe in my
> > > opinion and I do not want to do that.
> > >
> >
> > OK, good decision ;)
> >
> > One approach would be for some brave soul to pick his way through
> > the reboot code and ensure that we are correctly and reliably setting
> > system_state to SYSTEM_RESTART, then test that in __might_sleep().
> >
> > But this does suppress somewhat-useful debugging just because of sysrq-B
> > and I really wouldn't want to utilise the horrid system_state any more that
> > we are presently doing. I think on balance that it would be better if we
> > could do something more targetted, like modify emergency_restart() to test
> > in_interrupt() and to then apologetically set some well-named global flag
> > which will shut up __might_sleep(). Pretty foul, but I can't think of
> > anything better.
>
> ok, this might be better. How about we just stop calling mach_reboot_fixups()
> at sysrq-B time?
Fine with me, but what hardware will be messed up because of this?
thanks,
greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
