Hi, On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 01:24:27PM -0700, John Stultz wrote: > Looking over the leapsecond code, I noticed the printk messages > reporting the leapsecond insertion in the second_overflow path > were not using the printk_deferred method. This was surprising > since the printk_deferred method was added in part to avoid > printk-ing while holding the timekeeping locks. > > See 6d9bcb621b0b (timekeeping: use printk_deferred when holding > timekeeping seqlock) for further rational. > > I can only guess that this omission was a git add -p oversight.
second_overflow() is called from accumulate_nsecs_to_secs(). accumulate_nsecs_to_secs() is called from update_wall_time() - once directly - once via logarithmic_accumulation() Both calls are before write_seqcount_begin(&tk_core.seq). So it looks safe to use printk there. Regards, -- Jiri Bohac <jbo...@suse.cz> SUSE Labs, SUSE CZ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
