Re: 2.4.18 Preempt Freezeups

From: Dave Jones (davej@suse.de)
Date: Sun Mar 17 2002 - 07:59:08 EST

Next message: Roman Zippel: "alternative linux configurator prototype v0.2"
Previous message: Anton Blanchard: "Re: [Lse-tech] 7.52 second kernel compile"
In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: 2.4.18 Preempt Freezeups"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Sun, Mar 17, 2002 at 03:31:24AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:

> Think about profiling registers, mtrrs, msrs, and so forth. For example
> if we had thread handling MCE traps we would hit a problem. As it happens
> MCE is an interrupt so its all nice.

Ah, I'm glad you mentioned this. It's reminded me that my
timer-based 'check for non-fatal machine check and log' code
needs some work for SMP..

Are routines called with smp_call_function() preempt safe, or
must they have extra locking added ?

-- 
| Dave Jones.        http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
| SuSE Labs
-
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/

Next message: Roman Zippel: "alternative linux configurator prototype v0.2"
Previous message: Anton Blanchard: "Re: [Lse-tech] 7.52 second kernel compile"
In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: 2.4.18 Preempt Freezeups"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 23 2002 - 22:00:13 EST