On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2005 at 08:21:29AM -0700, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
> > On Sat, 12 Mar 2005, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >
> > > On APM resume this morning on my Thinkpad X31, I got a "spin_lock is
> > > already locked" error; see below. This doesn't happen on every resume,
> > > though it's happened before. The kernel is 2.6.11 plus a bunch of
> > > (hopefully unrelated...) NFS patches.
> > >
> > > Mar 12 07:07:31 puzzle kernel: PCI: Setting latency timer of device
> > > 0000:00:1f.5 to 64
> > > Mar 12 07:07:31 puzzle kernel: arch/i386/kernel/time.c:179:
> > > spin_lock(arch/i386/kernel/time.c:c0603c28) already locked by
> > > arch/i386/kernel/time.c/309
> > > Mar 12 07:07:31 puzzle kernel: arch/i386/kernel/time.c:316:
> > > spin_unlock(arch/i386/kernel/time.c:c0603c28) not locked
> >
> > APM was calling device_power_down and device_power_up with interrupts
> > enabled, resulting in a few calls to get_cmos_time being done with
> > interrupts enabled (rtc_lock needs to be acquired with interrupts
> > disabled).
>
> Thanks, I haven't been following the discussion carefully, but for
> what's it worth I did apply that patch and now (a few suspend-resume
> cycles later) haven't seen the spin_lock warning or seen any other ill
> effects.
>
> Let me know if there's any testing it would be useful for me to do.
Thanks for testing it, suspend/resume cycles are what i was most
interested in.
Zwane
-
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/
