lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Fix x86_64 _spin_lock_irqsave()
Edward Falk wrote:
> Add spin_lock_string_flags and _raw_spin_lock_flags() to
> asm-x86_64/spinlock.h so that _spin_lock_irqsave() has the same
> semantics on x86_64 as it does on i386 and does *not* have interrupts
> disabled while it is waiting for the lock.
>
> This fix is courtesy of Michael Davidson

So, what's the bug? You shouldn't rely on these semantics anyway
because you should never expect to wait for a spinlock for so long
(and it may be the case that irqs can't be enabled anyway).

BTW. you should be cc'ing Andi Kleen (x86+/-64 maintainer) on
this type of stuff.

No comments on the merits of adding this feature. I suppose parity
with i386 is a good thing, though.

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com

-
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: 2006-08-24 05:15    [W:0.323 / U:0.196 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site