Re: [SMP lock BUG?] Re: Feedback on preemptible kernel patch

From: Robert Love (rml@tech9.net)
Date: Mon Sep 17 2001 - 17:41:46 EST


On Fri, 2001-09-14 at 05:15, Pavel Machek wrote:
> is it legal to kmap_atomic(a,b); kmap_atomic(c,d); kunmap_atomic(a,b); ?
> If so, your patch may need some ounting....

ctx_sw_on and ctx_sw_off use a recursive spinlock, so the calls to
kunmap_atomic won't drop the slock until the last call.

-- 
Robert M. Love
rml at ufl.edu
rml at tech9.net

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Sep 23 2001 - 21:00:22 EST