Messages in this thread | | | From | Rusty Russell <> | Subject | Re: in_interrupt race | Date | Wed, 24 Apr 2002 14:43:04 +1000 |
| |
In message <20020423093151.A17302@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> you write: > On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 01:25:24PM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote: > > Yes: the old CPU happens to be processing an interrupt now. > > The neat solution is to follow Linus' original instinct and make > > PREEMPT an option only for UP: I only like preempt because it brings > > UP into line with SMP, effectively enlarging the SMP userbase to reasonable > > size. > > > -bool 'Preemptible kernel' CONFIG_PREEMPT > > +dep_bool 'Preemptible kernel' CONFIG_PREEMPT $CONFIG_SMP > > -bool 'Preemptible Kernel' CONFIG_PREEMPT > > +dep_bool 'Preemptible Kernel' CONFIG_PREEMPT $CONFIG_SMP > > Do you really mean that CONFIG_PREEMPT is only available if CONFIG_SMP is > 'y' or undefined?
<sigh>... Of course that should be reversed. if [ "$CONFIG_SMP" != y ]; then bool 'Preemptible Kernel' CONFIG_PREEMPT fi
Thanks, Rusty. -- Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell. - 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/
| |