Re: [PATCH 07/10] uml: avoid fixing faults while atomic

From: Linus Torvalds
Date: Wed Sep 21 2005 - 15:30:48 EST




On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> There's an extremely special-case in the pagefault handlers where we fail
> the fault if in_atomic(). It's unrelated to spinlocks (spinlocks don't
> even cause in_atomic() to become true if !CONFIG_PREEMPT).

There's a few other places where we use those semantics, though.

Like "get_futex_value_locked()".

> So I think this change is only needed if UML implements kmap_atomic, as in
> arch/i386/mm/highmem.c, which it surely does not do?

No. Every architecture needs to honor it, or they are screwed.

Linus
-
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/