![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
kernel list a écrit : > My understanding is that get_vm_area_node etc. can't be called in > interrupt context because vmlist_lock is obtained with read_lock / > write_lock. I am wondering if it makes sense to use read_lock_bh / > write_lock_bh so that get_vm_area_node can be called in soft interrupt > context. All the code executed when holding vmlist_lock is walking > through the list, so it shouldn't change the behavior. If it does make > sense, BUG_ON(in_interrupt()) can be changed to BUG_ON(in_irq()). Maybe it is just me, but I like to know people names. Or maybe your name really is kernel list ? I wonder why a soft irq would want to lookup vm areas. (since vmalloc() from soft irq is *really* forbiden) Eric - 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: 2006-12-08 07:43 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||