Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 3 Nov 2002 20:11:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 3 Nov 2002 20:11:57 -0500 Received: from svr-ganmtc-appserv-mgmt.ncf.coxexpress.com ([24.136.46.5]:45324 "EHLO svr-ganmtc-appserv-mgmt.ncf.coxexpress.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 3 Nov 2002 20:11:56 -0500 Subject: Re: interrupt checks for spinlocks From: Robert Love To: William Lee Irwin III Cc: Pete Zaitcev , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20021104005339.GA16347@holomorphy.com> References: <200211040028.gA40S8600593@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20021104002813.GZ16347@holomorphy.com> <20021103194249.A1603@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20021104005339.GA16347@holomorphy.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 (1.0.8-10) Date: 03 Nov 2002 20:18:04 -0500 Message-Id: <1036372685.752.7.camel@phantasy> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 710 Lines: 21 On Sun, 2002-11-03 at 19:53, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > This non-reentrant stuff hurts my head. Another patch down the > toilet, I guess. No, I think you have a good idea. Pete is right, though, the current interrupt is disabled... but normally the other interrupts are still enabled. Your ideas #2, #3, and #4 are good. Because once the lock is tainted, you still want to ensure process context disables interrupts before grabbing the lock. Robert Love - 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/