lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [May]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 2.6.17-rc5-mm1

* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:

> > > It does that because it knows it's about to spend a long time talking
> > > with the mii registers and it doesn't want to do that with interrupts
> > > disabled.
> >
> > i still consider it a 'quirky' locking construct, because disabling
> > interrupts for a long time also disables all other devices sharing the
> > same IRQ line - not nice.
> >
> > Also, this is a really hard case for lockdep to detect
> > automatically. (fortunately it's also relatively rare)
>
> What's the standard way to teach lockdep about this?

Not yet. One possibility would be to use existing locks and to get rid
of the disable_irq(). One technique could be to disable the IRQ on the
card (i think the code already does this), and then call
synchronize_irq() instead of disable_irq().

Ingo
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-05-31 13:58    [W:0.074 / U:0.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site