From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: raw_spinlock_t rules Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2010 15:09:12 +0200 Message-ID: <4C960B78.4010804@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-kernel , KVM list , Marcelo Tosatti , Ingo Molnar To: Steven Rostedt , Thomas Gleixner Return-path: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Some time ago, the i8259 emulation code in kvm was changed to use raw_spinlock_t, as it was called in a preempt_disable() and local_irq_disable() context, which doesn't work with preemptible spinlocks used with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT. In Linux 2.6.37, the spinlock will no longer be taken in these contexts, so I'd like to change it to a normal spinlock_t. However, it is still taken in a spin_lock_irq() context. Is it okay to do this change? I figured since spin_lock_irq() is part of the spinlock infrastructure it might to the right thing. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function