lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Apr]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: kernel stack size
From
Date
On Sat, 2005-04-02 at 20:37 +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 02:04:11PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > You can also use globally static variables too. But this makes for
> > non-reentry code.
> >
> > Sometimes I don't feel that a kmalloc is worth it, and if the function
> > in question for the driver would seldom have problems with reentry, I
> > use a statically defined global, and protect it with spin_locks. If
> > these can also be used in interrupt context, you need to use the
> > spin_lock_irqsave variants. But don't do this if the critical section
> > has long latencies.
>
> ... and the first time copy_from_user() blocks under your spinlock
> you will get a nice shiny deadlock.

I forgot that he mentioned that this was for ioctls. I then use
semaphores if I need to access userspace. But if it just needs to modify
data around areas that only the kernel uses, without access to
userspace, than I use spinlocks.

I admit you really need to know what you're doing to use this method. If
I believe that a kmalloc would be too expensive, then I use the locking
of static variables. But each situation is different and I try to use
the best method for the occasion.

-- Steve


-
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: 2005-04-06 13:31    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site