lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/7] introduce atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave()
On 08/30, Roman Zippel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006, Kirill Korotaev wrote:
>
> > --- ./kernel/user.c.dlirq 2006-07-10 12:39:20.000000000 +0400
> > +++ ./kernel/user.c 2006-08-28 11:08:56.000000000 +0400
> > @@ -108,15 +108,12 @@ void free_uid(struct user_struct *up)
> > if (!up)
> > return;
> >
> > - local_irq_save(flags);
> > - if (atomic_dec_and_lock(&up->__count, &uidhash_lock)) {
> > + if (atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave(&up->__count, &uidhash_lock, flags)) {
> > uid_hash_remove(up);
> > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&uidhash_lock, flags);
> > key_put(up->uid_keyring);
> > key_put(up->session_keyring);
> > kmem_cache_free(uid_cachep, up);
> > - } else {
> > - local_irq_restore(flags);
> > }
> > }
>
> Why does this need protection against interrupts?

uidhash_lock can be taken from irq context. For example, delayed_put_task_struct()
does __put_task_struct()->free_uid().

Oleg.

-
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: 2006-08-30 12:37    [W:0.065 / U:0.476 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site