From: Keith Owens <kaos@sgi.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.6-rc3-mm1
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 23:32:48 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2015.1083331968@ocs3.ocs.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 30 Apr 2004 01:46:58 MST." <20040430014658.112a6181.akpm@osdl.org>
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 01:46:58 -0700,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> wrote:
>ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.6-rc3/2.6.6-rc3-mm1/
>+allow-architectures-to-reenable-interrupts-on-contended-spinlocks.patch
>
> Rework the spinlock code so that architectures can reenable interrupts when
> spinning in spin_lock_irq() or spin_lcok_irqsave(). Only implemented for
> ia64 at this stage.
Only spin_lock_irqsave(), not spin_lock_irq(). The patch needs the old
flags to determine if interrupts were originally enabled, the flags are
not saved for spin_lock_irq().
In theory, spin_lock_irq() should never be called when interrupts are
already disabled, the corresponding spin_unlock_irq() will
unconditionally enable interrupts. So it should be possible for
spin_lock_irq() to pass a constant flags value to
_raw_spin_lock_flags(), stating that interrupts were enabled before
spin_lock_irq(). Two problems with that :-
* The flags value for 'interrupts were enabled' is arch specific.
* I have seen buggy code that does spin_lock_irq() when interrupts
are already disabled. Unconditionally enabling interrupts while
waiting for a contended spin_lock_irq() will perturb that code.
For now, the patch only improves the performance of spin_lock_irqsave().
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-04-30 13:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-30 8:46 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 Andrew Morton
2004-04-30 13:32 ` Keith Owens [this message]
2004-05-01 19:13 ` [PATCH][2.6-mm] Allow i386 to reenable interrupts on lock contention Zwane Mwaikambo
2004-05-01 21:39 ` Andrew Morton
2004-05-01 22:21 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2004-05-01 22:51 ` Andrew Morton
2004-05-01 22:58 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2004-04-30 16:23 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 (compile stats) John Cherry
2004-04-30 22:37 ` Greg KH
2004-04-30 22:39 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-05-01 1:55 ` Greg KH
2004-05-01 6:12 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 Bruce Guenter
2004-05-01 10:48 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 R. J. Wysocki
2004-05-01 6:15 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 Ian Kent
2004-05-01 12:10 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 raven
2004-05-01 8:00 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 Harald Arnesen
2004-05-01 11:44 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1: modular ACPI button broken Adrian Bunk
2004-05-03 18:36 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2004-05-03 19:21 ` Len Brown
2004-05-01 18:45 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 Joshua Kwan
2004-05-02 0:38 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 Pasi Savolainen
2004-05-02 0:56 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 Andrew Morton
2004-05-02 10:27 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 Nick Piggin
2004-05-03 22:39 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 Pasi Savolainen
2004-05-03 14:49 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 raven
2004-05-03 14:56 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 raven
2004-05-03 16:10 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 Jeff Moyer
2004-05-04 1:00 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 Ian Kent
2004-05-04 1:53 ` 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 Ian Kent
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2015.1083331968@ocs3.ocs.com.au \
--to=kaos@sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox