Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: 2.6.18-rc1-mm1 | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Date | Mon, 10 Jul 2006 10:50:19 +0200 |
| |
> > - If a piece of kernel code is dealing with per-cpu data and cannot run > > atomically then it should have its own cpu hotplug handlers anyway. It > > is up to that code (ie: cpufreq) to provide its own locking against its > > own CPU hotplug callback. > > This still does not solve this cpufreq problem where it is trying to > take the same lock twice down the same call path.
that is broken beyond discussing anyway... "we don't know our locking rules so we do recursive mutexes" is ... NOT a good reason.
- 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/
| |