* Mike Galbraith | 2014-01-17 06:17:12 [+0100]: >On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 23:22 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> On Thu, 16 Jan 2014 04:08:57 +0100 >> Mike Galbraith <bitbuc...@online.de> wrote: >> >> > On Wed, 2014-01-15 at 20:58 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> > >> > >> > > 3.2.53-rt76-rc1 stable review patch. >> > > If anyone has any objections, please let me know. >> > >> > Not sure this is needed without the tglx don't unconditionally raise >> > timer softirq patch, and with that patch applied in the form it exists >> > in 3.12-rt9, as well as this one, you'll still eventually deadlock. >> >> Hmm, I'll have to take a look. This sounds to be missing from all the >> stable -rt kernels. I'll be pulling in the latest updates from 3.12-rt >> soon. > >Below are the two deadlocks I encountered with 3.12-rt9, which has both >$subject and timers-do-not-raise-softirq-unconditionally.patch applied.
This patch was introduced because we had a deadlock in run_local_timers() which took a sleeping lock in hardirq context. This seem not to be the case in v3.2 therefore I would suggest not to take this patch here because it does not fix anything. Mike, do you see these deadlocks with 3.12.*-rt11 as well? Sebastian -- 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/
