Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2006-02-03 at 12:35 +0100, Andy Wingo wrote:
On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 23:43 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
+ spin_lock(&dev_list_lock);
Stupid question: are you sure that something coming from an interrupt
handler won't try to grab this lock? For example from a cable unplug?
Yes, I'm pretty sure (but I hope some of the firewire experts will chime
in) -- but if you unplug or anything the node only goes into 'limbo' and
afaict if it is ever cleaned up then that comes from a thread context.
The lock will only be taken in non-atomic context. In particular, if a
mem1394 device is to be removed after cable unplug, the code will be run
by knodemgrd.
What is more recommendable for mutual exclusion in non-atomic context
(here also with very low probality of lock contention, given the current
implementation of ieee1394) --- a mutex or a spinlock?
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-==- --=- --=-=
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
