From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 04:59:20 +0000 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove spurious BUG from posix-cpu-timers Message-ID: <20050319045920.GL21986@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> References: <20050319044503.GK21986@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <20050318205334.087395d3.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050318205334.087395d3.akpm@osdl.org> Sender: To: Andrew Morton Cc: Matthew Wilcox , torvalds@osdl.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, roland@redhat.com List-ID: On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 08:53:34PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > > > > PA-RISC does not necessarily have interrupts disabled while timers are > > running. This doesn't appear to be a requirement, but posix-cpu-timers > > seems to think it is. > > > > But a bit later on we do > > spin_lock(&tsk->sighand->siglock); > > rather than spin_lock_irqsave()? We're in interrupt context ... we're ok, unless another interrupt handler tries to take the same spinlock. Maybe the posix cpu timer code should be using _irqsave anyway? -- "Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception." -- Mark Twain