Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:05:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:05:19 -0500 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:38627 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:05:17 -0500 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 06:12:41 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <20030327.061241.105170741.davem@redhat.com> To: trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no Cc: shmulik.hen@intel.com, dane@aiinet.com, bonding-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, bonding-announce@lists.sourceforge.net, netdev@oss.sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-net@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@transmeta.com, mingo@redhat.com, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru Subject: Re: BUG or not? GFP_KERNEL with interrupts disabled. From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: References: <20030327.054357.17283294.davem@redhat.com> X-FalunGong: Information control. X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 768 Lines: 19 From: Trond Myklebust Date: 27 Mar 2003 15:11:56 +0100 > IRQ disabling is meant to be stronger than softint disabling. In that case, you'll need to have things like spin_lock_irqrestore() call local_bh_enable() in order to run the pending softirqs. Is that worth the trouble? "trouble" is a weird word to use when the current behavior is just wrong. :-) My point is that it doesn't matter what the fix is, running softints while hw IRQs are disabled must be fixed. - 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/