lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] multithreaded coredumps for elf exeecutables
Date
On Thursday 21 March 2002 12:34 pm, Alan Cox wrote:
> > This why I grabbed all those locks, and did the two sets of IPI's in the
> > tcore patch.  Once the runqueue lock is grabbed, even if that process on
> > the
>
> If you IPI holding a lock whats going to happen if while the IPI is going
> across the cpus the other processor tries to grab the runqueue lock and
> is spinning on it with interrupts off ?

Then the at least 2 CPU's would quickly become dead locked on the
synchronization IPI this patch sends at the end of the suspend_other_threads
function call.

Interrupts shouldn't be turned off when grabbing the runqueue lock. Its also
a bad thing if they would happen to be off while calling into to schedule.

I think schedule was designed to be called only while interrupts are turned
on. It BUG's if "in_interrupt" to enforce this.

--mgross

-
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: 2005-03-22 13:25    [W:0.059 / U:0.296 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site