Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 13 Jan 2002 16:59:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 13 Jan 2002 16:59:25 -0500 Received: from dsl081-053-223.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([64.81.53.223]:22657 "EHLO starship.berlin") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 13 Jan 2002 16:59:15 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Daniel Phillips To: Alan Cox , rml@tech9.net (Robert Love) Subject: Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 23:02:27 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] Cc: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox), arjan@fenrus.demon.nl, landley@trommello.org (Rob Landley), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On January 12, 2002 09:21 pm, Alan Cox wrote: > > > I didn't see anywhere you check disable_irq(). Even if you did it doesnt > > > help when I mask the irq on the chip rather than using disable_irq() calls. > > > > Well, if IRQs are disabled we won't have the timer... would not the > > system panic anyhow if schedule() was called while in an interrupt > > handler? > > You completely misunderstand. > > disable_irq(n) > > I disable a single specific interrupt, I don't disable the timer interrupt. > Your code doesn't seem to handle that. Its just one of the examples of where > you really need priority handling, and thats a horrible dark and slippery > slope He just needs to disable preemption there, it's just a slight mod to disable/enable_irq. You probably have a few more of those, though... -- Daniel - 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/