On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> There's an extremely special-case in the pagefault handlers where we fail
> the fault if in_atomic(). It's unrelated to spinlocks (spinlocks don't
> even cause in_atomic() to become true if !CONFIG_PREEMPT).
There's a few other places where we use those semantics, though.
Like "get_futex_value_locked()".
> So I think this change is only needed if UML implements kmap_atomic, as in
> arch/i386/mm/highmem.c, which it surely does not do?
No. Every architecture needs to honor it, or they are screwed.
Linus
-
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]
| |
 |