On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 19:57:12 + Pavel Machek wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
> On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:13:19AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> we dont call the reboot notifiers during emergency reboot mainly because
>> it could be called from atomic
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 19:57:12 + Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:13:19AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > > we dont call the reboot notifiers during emergency reboot mainly
> > > > > because
> > > > > it could be called from atomic context and reboot notifiers
Hi!
> > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:13:19AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > we dont call the reboot notifiers during emergency reboot mainly
> > > > because
> > > > it could be called from atomic context and reboot notifiers are a
> > > > blocking notifier list. But actually the kernel is
Hi!
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:13:19AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
we dont call the reboot notifiers during emergency reboot mainly
because
it could be called from atomic context and reboot notifiers are a
blocking notifier list. But actually the kernel is often perfectly
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 19:57:12 + Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:13:19AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
we dont call the reboot notifiers during emergency reboot mainly
because
it could be called from atomic context and reboot notifiers are a
blocking
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 19:57:12 + Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:13:19AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
we dont call the reboot notifiers during emergency reboot mainly because
it could be called from atomic context and reboot
* Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Making it dependent upon CONFIG_PREEMPT seems a bit sucky. Perhaps
> pass in some "you were called from /proc/sysrq-trigger" notification?
looks quite invasive to the whole sysrq interfaces, it trickles all the
way down into sysrq.c's handler
> On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 10:39:17 +0100 Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> * Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:13:19AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > we dont call the reboot notifiers during emergency reboot mainly because
> > > it could be called
* Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:13:19AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > we dont call the reboot notifiers during emergency reboot mainly because
> > it could be called from atomic context and reboot notifiers are a
> > blocking notifier list. But actually
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:13:19AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> we dont call the reboot notifiers during emergency reboot mainly because
> it could be called from atomic context and reboot notifiers are a
> blocking notifier list. But actually the kernel is often perfectly
> reschedulable in
Subject: [patch] call reboot notifier list when doing an emergency reboot
From: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
my laptop (Lenovo T60) hangs during reboot if the shutdown notifiers are
not called. So the following command, which on other systems i use as a
quick way to reboot into a new kernel:
Subject: [patch] call reboot notifier list when doing an emergency reboot
From: Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
my laptop (Lenovo T60) hangs during reboot if the shutdown notifiers are
not called. So the following command, which on other systems i use as a
quick way to reboot into a new kernel:
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:13:19AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
we dont call the reboot notifiers during emergency reboot mainly because
it could be called from atomic context and reboot notifiers are a
blocking notifier list. But actually the kernel is often perfectly
reschedulable in this
* Russell King [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:13:19AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
we dont call the reboot notifiers during emergency reboot mainly because
it could be called from atomic context and reboot notifiers are a
blocking notifier list. But actually the kernel
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 10:39:17 +0100 Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Russell King [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:13:19AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
we dont call the reboot notifiers during emergency reboot mainly because
it could be called from atomic
* Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Making it dependent upon CONFIG_PREEMPT seems a bit sucky. Perhaps
pass in some you were called from /proc/sysrq-trigger notification?
looks quite invasive to the whole sysrq interfaces, it trickles all the
way down into sysrq.c's handler prototype,
16 matches
Mail list logo
