[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:0.075 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site