Commit 00442995 authored by Jan Beulich's avatar Jan Beulich Committed by Linus Torvalds

handle recursive calls to bust_spinlocks()

Various architectures may call bust_spinlocks() recursively; the function
itself, however, doesn't appear to be meant to be called in this manner.
Nevertheless, this doesn't appear to be a problem as long as
bust_spinlocks(0) doesn't get called twice in a row (otherwise,
unblank_screen() may enter the scheduler).  However, at least on i386 die()
has been capable of returning (and on other architectures this should
really be that way, too) when notify_die() returns NOTIFY_STOP.

Short of getting a reply to a respective query, this patch makes
bust_spinlocks() increment/decrement oops_in_progress, and wake klogd only
when the count drops back to zero.
Signed-off-by: default avatarJan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: default avatarLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
parent b311e921
...@@ -17,12 +17,12 @@ ...@@ -17,12 +17,12 @@
void __attribute__((weak)) bust_spinlocks(int yes) void __attribute__((weak)) bust_spinlocks(int yes)
{ {
if (yes) { if (yes) {
oops_in_progress = 1; ++oops_in_progress;
} else { } else {
#ifdef CONFIG_VT #ifdef CONFIG_VT
unblank_screen(); unblank_screen();
#endif #endif
oops_in_progress = 0; if (--oops_in_progress == 0)
wake_up_klogd(); wake_up_klogd();
} }
} }
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment