Re: [PATCH -rt] scheduling while atomic in fs/file.c

On Mon, 15 May 2006, Daniel Walker wrote:

>
> Why would it be a problem if the timer moved ? Or the work queue? both
> are protected under a spinlock which is consistently held .
>

fine, but the patch is still wrong.  If it really doesn't matter
which one it's on, instead of moving the put, just get the cpu var with
per_cpu(fdtable_defer_list, raw_smp_processor_id()) and get rid of the put
altogether.

Ingo,

Didn't John have a patch that did something with get_percpu_var() that
made this simple?

-- Steve

-
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 -rt] scheduling while atomic in fs/file.c
  - From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH -rt] scheduling while atomic in fs/file.c
  - From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH -rt] scheduling while atomic in fs/file.c
  - From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH -rt] scheduling while atomic in fs/file.c
  - From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH -rt] scheduling while atomic in fs/file.c
  - From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH -rt] scheduling while atomic in fs/file.c
  - From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH -rt] scheduling while atomic in fs/file.c
Next by Date: RE: GPL and NON GPL version modules
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH -rt] scheduling while atomic in fs/file.c
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH -rt] scheduling while atomic in fs/file.c
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]