Re: [PATCH 1/7] introduce atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave()

Hi,

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

> > Why does this need protection against interrupts?
> 
> uidhash_lock can be taken from irq context. For example, delayed_put_task_struct()
> does __put_task_struct()->free_uid().

AFAICT it's called via rcu, does that mean anything released via rcu has 
to be protected against interrupts?

bye, Roman
-
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 1/7] introduce atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave()
    • From: Dipankar Sarma <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/7] introduce atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave()
    • From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH] BC: resource beancounters (v3)
    • From: Kirill Korotaev <[email protected]>
  • [PATCH 1/7] introduce atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave()
    • From: Kirill Korotaev <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/7] introduce atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave()
    • From: Roman Zippel <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/7] introduce atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave()
    • From: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/7] introduce atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave()
• Next by Date: [PATCH] NOMMU: Check that access_process_vm() has a valid target
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/7] introduce atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave()
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/7] introduce atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave()
• 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]