On Sun, 2005-08-21 at 20:52 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> erp. posix_timers has its own irq-safe lock, so we're doing extra,
> unneeded locking in that code path.
Possibly, the posix timer code is rather convoluted in this area so I'm
not entirely sure my analysis is correct.
> I think providing locking inside idr.c was always a mistake - generally we
> rely on caller-provided locking for such things.
Well, the reason is because they wanted lockless pre-alloc. If you do
it locked, you can't use GFP_KERNEL for the memory allocation flag which
rather defeats its purpose.
Perhaps the bug is in the API. We have pre-allocate, new, find and
remove. Perhaps what we're missing is a reuse all of which could then
rely on caller provided locking, with pre-alloc and remove requiring
user context but new, find and reuse being happy in irq context.
James
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |