lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch] 2.6.6-rc2 Allow architectures to reenable interrupts on contended spinlocks
On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 10:05:25PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 21:36:48 +1000,
> Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org> wrote:
> >I was just thinking yesterday that it would be good to reenable
> >interrupts during spin_lock_irq on ppc64. I am hacking on the
> >spinlocks for ppc64 at the moment and this looks like something worth
> >adding.
> >
> >Why not keep _raw_spin_lock as it is and only use _raw_spin_lock_flags
> >in the spin_lock_irq{,save} case?
>
> Using both _raw_spin_lock and _raw_spin_lock_flags doubles the amount
> of code to maintain.

So define _raw_spin_lock to _raw_spin_lock_flags(lock, 0) in ia64 code?

-
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 14:02    [W:0.038 / U:0.860 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site