Re: [PATCH -rt] revert bh_lru_lock() to preempt_disable()

On Wed, 2006-05-03 at 22:47 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Daniel Walker <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > 	The bh_lru_lock() was set to disable interrupt to protect from 
> > IPI's, which are only on SMP . So I don't think it's needed in UP 
> > PREEMPT_RT configs.
> 
> i agree that this is a problem, but the fix is incorrect. What would be 
> the right approach is to convert the PER_CPU bh_lrus to PER_CPU_LOCKED, 
> and to use the appropriate primitives to use them. That automatically 
> makes this code rt-safe. (it isnt right now)


Hmm, in UP it should be safe to access per cpu data under either a
preempt_disable or local_irq_disable . I'm not sure how RT changes
that .. Is there some other part of the code that isn't rt-safe, which
I've overlooked ?

Daniel

-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH -rt] revert bh_lru_lock() to preempt_disable()
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH -rt] revert bh_lru_lock() to preempt_disable()
    • From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH -rt] revert bh_lru_lock() to preempt_disable()
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH -rt] scheduling while atomic in fs/file.c
• Next by Date: RE: Problems with EDAC coexisting with BIOS
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH -rt] revert bh_lru_lock() to preempt_disable()
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH -rt] revert bh_lru_lock() to preempt_disable()
• 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]