Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 30 Jul 2004 00:22:05 -0400 | From | Brian Gerst <> | Subject | Re: [cleanup] do_general_protection doesn't disable irq |
| |
Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > A trap gate shouldn't affect the irq status at all. > > This should be a valid cleanup that removes a slightly confusing noop: > > Index: linux-2.5/arch/i386/kernel/traps.c > =================================================================== > RCS file: /home/andrea/crypto/cvs/linux-2.5/arch/i386/kernel/traps.c,v > retrieving revision 1.77 > diff -u -p -r1.77 traps.c > --- linux-2.5/arch/i386/kernel/traps.c 13 Jul 2004 18:02:33 -0000 1.77 > +++ linux-2.5/arch/i386/kernel/traps.c 30 Jul 2004 02:44:23 -0000 > @@ -431,9 +431,6 @@ DO_ERROR_INFO(17, SIGBUS, "alignment che > > asmlinkage void do_general_protection(struct pt_regs * regs, long error_code) > { > - if (regs->eflags & X86_EFLAGS_IF) > - local_irq_enable(); > - > if (regs->eflags & VM_MASK) > goto gp_in_vm86; > > > Thanks to Karsten for noticing a trap gate doesn't actually enable irq > by default either (offtopic issue with the above patch, but while > reading the 2.6 code I found the above bit which just confused me more > since it's a noop, either that or you meant to use set_intr_gate, not > set_trap_gate on the do_general_protection handler, but it seems not > needed to use a trap gate since a trap gate shouldn't enable irqs by > default). Please correct me if wrong.
This is there for vm86 mode. See http://tinyurl.com/3m5nr
-- Brian Gerst - 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/
| |