Re: [PATCH -mm] x86_64 UP needs smp_call_function_single

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 10:22:20 +0100
Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:

> > 
> > btw, does anyone know why the SMP versions of this function use
> > spin_lock_bh(&call_lock)?
> that makes no sense (neither the get_cpu()/put_cpu() gymnastics) if this
> is called with irqs disabled all the time.

smp_call_function_single() must be called with local interrupts ENabled.

But why isn't it just spin_lock()?


Eric simply copied that code from ia64, which added the spin_lock_bh()
in 2.4.8.  Ho-hum.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

[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]
  Powered by Linux