rough-draft VKERNEL host-initiated shutdown patch
Chris Turner
c.turner at 199technologies.org
Tue Jun 12 04:48:23 PDT 2007
Matthew Dillon wrote:
>
> This looks quite nice. I just realized though that it isn't safe
> to run reboot() (or probably ksignal either) from the idle halt
> code, so scratch that part.
thanks. ok.
>
> We have to find a good place to put this. I think what we may have
> to do is create a kernel thread whos only job is to shut the kernel
> down, and then check the mailbox from inside signalmailbox() and have
> it wake the special kernel thread up.
>
> Would you like to have a go at that or would you like me to do it?
If the special thread doesn't need to do any other cleanup that I'm
likely unaware of, I can give it another shot this weekend.
Not yet knowing the overall code paths unfortunately means I'm
kind of coding this blind .. but I suppose the point is to learn as I go.
I assume the reason for the thread is that the way things are currently
called, the VK might not be in a consistent internal state when the
signal is delivered to init and/or init is rescheduled to run?
to clarify:
- keep signal handler and shutdown function in the exception setup
- create kthread somewhere ( main() ? platform init? )
- remove checks from both idle loop / task switching areas
- add check / wakeup logic to signalmailbox()
Thanks,
- Chris
More information about the Submit
mailing list