[lkml]   [2005]   [Sep]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 07/10] uml: avoid fixing faults while atomic

    On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > There's an extremely special-case in the pagefault handlers where we fail
    > the fault if in_atomic(). It's unrelated to spinlocks (spinlocks don't
    > even cause in_atomic() to become true if !CONFIG_PREEMPT).

    There's a few other places where we use those semantics, though.

    Like "get_futex_value_locked()".

    > So I think this change is only needed if UML implements kmap_atomic, as in
    > arch/i386/mm/highmem.c, which it surely does not do?

    No. Every architecture needs to honor it, or they are screwed.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.019 / U:28.228 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site