Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> On Monday 22 October 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > It's almost always a bug to do spin_lock_irq() when local interrupts are
> > disabled.  However iirc when we've tried to add runtime debugging to catch
> > that, it triggered false-positives which made the idea unworkable.  I forget
> > where.
> 
> I tried this as well a few years ago, and I think I hit a few places in
> the early initialization, but nothing unfixable.

Hmm, lockdep checks this already. If it does not catch it, we need to fix it.

     tglx

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations
    • From: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations
    • From: Alexey Dobriyan <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations
    • From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations
    • From: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: rt73usb: support for wireless in Kohjinsha subnotebook
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 09/10] Change table chaining layout
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations
• 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]