Re: [SMP lock BUG?] Re: Feedback on preemptible kernel patch

From: Robert Love (rml@tech9.net)
Date: Mon Sep 17 2001 - 19:19:28 EST


On Mon, 2001-09-17 at 18:40, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> > is it legal to kmap_atomic(a,b); kmap_atomic(c,d); kunmap_atomic(a,b);
>
> Yes, that's legal - just think about one kmap_atomic from process
> context, and another one in irq context.
>
> > If so, your patch may need some ounting....
> > Pavel
>
> I hope ctx_sw_off does internal counting, correct?

yes, ctx_sw_off atomically increments a counter and ctx_sw_on
atomic_dec_and_test()s it.

-- 
Robert M. Love
rml at ufl.edu
rml at tech9.net

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Sep 23 2001 - 21:00:22 EST