Re: [PATCH] remove LOCK_SECTION from x86_64 spin_lock asm

[Ingo Molnar]

* Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> I think the idea was that the spinlock functions should be small
> enough that they don't have any stack local variables. [...]

this might work for x64, but even there, are you sure it works even with
CONFIG_PREEMPT enabled (there the spinlocks are more complex)? It sure
wont work on x86 so i think we need a generic 'soft PC' solution.

the alternative would be to unwind the stack - quite some task on some 
platforms ...

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