Re: [PATCH][2.6-mm] i386: enable interrupts on contention inspin_lock_irq

[Zwane Mwaikambo]

On Wed, 26 May 2004, Duncan Sands wrote:

> > However I have seen buggy code where spin_lock_irq() was issued with
> > interrupts disabled. [...]
>
> Some time ago I sent a patch to lkml that tests for this [1].
> And guess what - it happens all over the place [2].  Also, the
> scheduler often gets called with interrupts disabled (schedule()
> does spin_lock_irq), but the cases I checked all turned out to be
> OK [3].  Perhaps it is more problematic now?

I'll run with the debug code and audit any suspect ones. The ones
mentioned below all seem ok.

> [1] http://seclists.org/lists/linux-kernel/2003/May/5585.html
> [2] http://seclists.org/lists/linux-kernel/2003/May/5842.html
> [3] http://seclists.org/lists/linux-kernel/2003/May/5581.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/