Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267700AbUIHN3r (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:29:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267819AbUIHN0v (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:26:51 -0400 Received: from dragnfire.mtl.istop.com ([66.11.160.179]:6887 "EHLO dsl.commfireservices.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268345AbUIHNYN (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:24:13 -0400 Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:28:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Zwane Mwaikambo To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Subject: Re: [patch] preempt-smp.patch, 2.6.9-rc1-bk14 In-Reply-To: <20040908130136.GB20132@elte.hu> Message-ID: References: <20040908111751.GA11507@elte.hu> <20040908130136.GB20132@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 785 Lines: 19 On Wed, 8 Sep 2004, Ingo Molnar wrote: > at a quick glance your patch doesnt seem to cover the following locking > primitives: read_lock_irqsave(), read_lock_irq(), write_lock_irqsave, > write_lock_irq(). Also, i think your 2.6.6 patch doesnt apply anymore > because it clashes with your very nice out-of-line spinlocks patch that > went into -BK recently ;) Yes i intentionally avoided rwlocks, in that case i think write_lock_* would be the one to work on, but this is all covered by CONFIG_PREEMPT and your patch now. Thanks, Zwane - 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/