Hi,
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006, Dipankar Sarma wrote:
> > > 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?
>
> No. You need protection only if you have are using some
> data that can also be used by the RCU callback. For example,
> if your RCU callback just calls kfree(), you don't have to
> do a spin_lock_bh().
In this case kfree() does its own interrupt synchronization. I didn't
realize before that rcu had this (IMO serious) limitation. I think there
should be two call_rcu() variants, one that queues the callback in a soft
irq and a second which queues it in a thread context.
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/
[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]
