Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:13:44 +0530 | From | Srikar Dronamraju <> | Subject | Re: [RESEND] [RFC][PATCH X86_32 1/2]: Call do_notify_resume() with interrupts enabled |
| |
> Ingo, Thomas, I think this is your call, but it seems valid, > > Linus >
Hey Ingo, Thomas,
Can you please let me know if you have taken a look at this patch and if you have any reservations?
I would also be happy to know your thoughts on the other patch in the series which makes sure that notify_die is called irrespective of kprobes.
-- Thanks and Regards Srikar
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 10/25, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > >> > >> do_notify_resume() gets called with interrupts disabled on x86_32. This > >> is different from the x86_64 behavior, where interrupts are enabled at > >> the time. > > > > And note that do_notify_resume() paths assume that irqs are enabled. > > key_replace_session_keyring/get_signal_to_deliver start with _lock_irq. > > > > IOW, I vote for this change even if I can't ack it (although it looks > > "obviously correct" to me). In fact refrigerator() looks buggy without > > this change. Yes, it enables irqs but only "by accident", via unlock_irq(). > > And we are going to remove this recalc_sigpending() from freezer. > > > > > >> Queries on lkml on this issue hasn't yielded any clear answer. Lets make > >> x86_32 behave the same as x86_64, unless there is a real reason to > >> maintain status quo. > >> > >> Please refer https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/9/27/130 for more details > >> > >> A similar change was suggested in arm > >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/8/25/231 > >> > >> My 32-bit machine works fine (tm) with the patch below > >>
-- 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/
| |