From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932443AbXGYAjr (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:39:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760347AbXGYAjk (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:39:40 -0400 Received: from smtp124.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com ([69.147.64.97]:48021 "HELO smtp124.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1759317AbXGYAjj (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jul 2007 20:39:39 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=pacbell.net; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id; b=FJ5Y3CX7dgAA60EpoVFzbw15WMOgCIZIBxdQl3KfsU34wAMjQWsVZ+vzAEUMtzR3BIbTiiExQZLyQxwDc8qwHRpHl/z+k6qnZv2Rs0TI8qZBgQDOXoobOR7K3L+rm4dXPyY6DIMUvw0Yuvh4CwjaNyHOea+p8dI0baZG1AjEqZY= ; X-YMail-OSG: c6oUS8sVM1mDihvnXJrPhUxxMJMJv9TH79TUu2KVhBuMDT1BSzBW23APEVOqW5ETnoOCdiczCA-- From: David Brownell To: Russell King Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.23-rc1] dma_free_coherent() needs irqs enabled (sigh) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:35:55 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 Cc: Linux Kernel list , David Miller References: <200707241429.05615.david-b@pacbell.net> <200707241608.12198.david-b@pacbell.net> <20070724231157.GA30861@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20070724231157.GA30861@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200707241735.55427.david-b@pacbell.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 24 July 2007, Russell King wrote: > > > > > > I think you got the year wrong: > > > > > > 5edf71ae (Russell King      2005-11-25 15:52:51 +0000 364)      WARN_ON(irqs_disabled()); > > > > > > which is due to this commit: > > > > > > [ARM] Do not call flush_tlb_kernel_range() with IRQs disabled. > > > > This little "to do" list item has been sitting in my mailbox way > > too long then.  Certainly since it was fair to say "last year"!  ;) > > Are you intentionally not reading what I said? Hardly. Go back and read what *I* wrote! It just took a while to notice that behavioral change, since I don't normally run the relevant regression tests using lockdep. It was sometime in the first half of 2006, ergo "since it was fair to say 'last year'". A bunch of piecemeal workarounds followed; and recently they were all replaced with a more fundamental fix. This doc patch was the tail end of the process of recovering from that change ... and the warnings are there to help other folk from seeing the same issue in other contexts. - Dave