> You could, but why not always just schedule_work()? If we are hosed by
> broken workqueue/scheduler locking, the user isn't going to
> see those files in sysfs either way :)
I'm not concern about failure of sysfs operations.
In panic function call, panic_notifier_chain is kicked. Also users m
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Seiji Aguchi wrote:
>
>> I'm not a fan of creating a periodic timer that wakes up here to check for
>> an event that should be considered very rare.
>>
>> Can this just become scheduled work? Scheduling work itself is a very
>> lightweight process and should be
> I'm not a fan of creating a periodic timer that wakes up here to check for an
> event that should be considered very rare.
>
> Can this just become scheduled work? Scheduling work itself is a very
> lightweight process and should be relatively safe to do from a
> pstore write.
I agree that
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Seiji Aguchi wrote:
> [Problem]
> efi_pstore creates sysfs entries ,which enable users to access to NVRAM,
> in a write callback. If a kernel panic happens in interrupt contexts, pstore
> may
> fail because it could sleep due to dynamic memory allocations duri
[Problem]
efi_pstore creates sysfs entries ,which enable users to access to NVRAM,
in a write callback. If a kernel panic happens in interrupt contexts, pstore
may
fail because it could sleep due to dynamic memory allocations during creating
sysfs entries.
[Patch Description]
This patch remo
5 matches
Mail list logo
