Re: [PATCH] i386: don't blindly enable interrupts in die()

>>> Andrew Morton <[email protected]> 08.11.05 23:57:21 >>>
>"Jan Beulich" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>  Rather than blindly re-enabling interrupts in die(), save their
state
>>  upon entry and then restore that state.
>
>What is the reason for this change?

If the kernel is in really bad condition and faults with interrupts
disabled, re-enabling them in die() may cause even more trouble,
implying more chances of data corruption.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH] i386: don't blindly enable interrupts in die()
    • From: "Jan Beulich" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] i386: don't blindly enable interrupts in die()
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] minor ELF addition
• Next by Date: Re: [Patch] add AOP_TRUNCATED_PAGE, prepend AOP_ to WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] i386: don't blindly enable interrupts in die()
• Next by thread: [PATCH] i386: move SIMD initialization
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]