Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 20 Mar 2001 11:11:34 -0800 | From | george anzinger <> |
| |
Dawson Engler wrote: > > > Is it difficult to split it into "interrupts disabled" and "spin lock > > held"? > Is it difficult to test for matching spinlock pairs such as spin_lock_irq/spin_unlock_irq. Sometimes a spin_lock_irq is followed by a spin_unlock and a separate interrupt re-enable. This sort of usage, while not strictly wrong, does make it hard to use the spin_lock/unlock macros to do preemption. This said, pairing information would be very helpful. Note, there are several flavors here, not just the one I cited.
George - 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/
| |