![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > > It does that because it knows it's about to spend a long time talking > > > with the mii registers and it doesn't want to do that with interrupts > > > disabled. > > > > i still consider it a 'quirky' locking construct, because disabling > > interrupts for a long time also disables all other devices sharing the > > same IRQ line - not nice. > > > > Also, this is a really hard case for lockdep to detect > > automatically. (fortunately it's also relatively rare) > > What's the standard way to teach lockdep about this? Not yet. One possibility would be to use existing locks and to get rid of the disable_irq(). One technique could be to disable the IRQ on the card (i think the code already does this), and then call synchronize_irq() instead of disable_irq(). Ingo - 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: 2006-05-31 13:58 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||