Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 21 Apr 2001 15:17:37 +0100 | From | Russell King <> | Subject | Re: x86 rwsem in 2.4.4pre[234] are still buggy [was Re: rwsem benchmarks [Re: generic rwsem [Re: Alpha "process table hang"]]] |
| |
On Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 04:03:27PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 04:45:32PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > I would suggest the following: > > > > - the generic semaphores should use the lock that already exists in the > > wait-queue as the semaphore spinlock. > > Ok, that is what my generic code does.
Erm, spin_lock()? What if up_read or up_write gets called from interrupt context (is this allowed)?
If these are now allowed, then maybe we should either consider getting the Stanford checker to check for this, or else we ought to do a debugging if (in_interupt()) BUG(); thing.
-- Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) The developer of ARM Linux http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |