Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 7 Jun 2006 00:03:48 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: mutex vs. local irqs (Was: 2.6.18 -mm merge plans) |
| |
On Wed, 07 Jun 2006 16:44:31 +1000 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> So what can we do ?
Well my plan is to keep being sucky, hence work-around-ppc64-bootup-bug-by-making-mutex-debugging-save-restore-irqs.patch.
The rule is that sleeping locks need to preserve local IRQs in the non-contended case. So be it, move on to more pressing things. - 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/
| |