Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH -rt] scheduling while atomic in fs/file.c | From | Daniel Walker <> | Date | Sun, 14 May 2006 10:32:55 -0700 |
| |
On Sun, 2006-05-14 at 12:44 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Sun, 14 May 2006, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > Quite the smp_processor_id() wanrings. I don't see any SMP > > concerns here . It just adds to a percpu list, so it shouldn't > > matter if it switches after sampling fdtable_defer_list . > > I'm not so sure that there isn't SMP concerns here. I have to catch a > train in a few minutes, otherwise I would look deeper into this. But this > might be a candidate to turn fdtable_defer_list into a per_cpu_locked.
I reviewed it again, and it looks like these percpu structures have a spinlock to protect the list from being emptied by a work queue while things are being added to the list . The lock appears to be used properly . The work queue frees struct fdtable pointers added to the list , the only place these structures are added is in the block I've modified .
I think making this a locked percpu would just be overkill ..
Daniel
- 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/
| |