Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2004 18:16:10 +0200
From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>,
       Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org
Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] rmap: parisc __flush_dcache_page
Message-ID: <20040408161610.GF31667@dualathlon.random>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0404081500520.7116-100000@localhost.localdomain> <1081435237.1885.144.camel@mulgrave> <20040408151415.GB31667@dualathlon.random> <1081438124.2105.207.camel@mulgrave> <20040408153412.GD31667@dualathlon.random> <1081439244.2165.236.camel@mulgrave>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1081439244.2165.236.camel@mulgrave>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 888
Lines: 16

On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 10:47:23AM -0500, James Bottomley wrote:
> candidate for being in interrupt (even though most drivers should be
> offloading to softirq/tasklets).

softirq tasklets would be unsafe too, oh well, if you take it really
from irq context (irq/softirq/tasklet) then just a spinlock isn't
enough, it'd need to be an irq safe lock or whatever similar plus you
must be sure to never generate exceptions triggering the call inside the
critical section. sounds like we need some per-arch abstraction to cover
this, we for sure don't want an irq spinlock for this, then we can as
well leave the semaphore for all archs but parisc.
-
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/