Re: What if a TLB flush needed to sleep?

[Alan Cox]

> 	down(&ptcg_sem);
> 	... execute ptc.g
> 	up(&ptcg_sem);

That will dig you a nice large hole for real time to fall into. If you
want to do rt nicely you want to avoid semaphores and the corresponding
lack of ability to fix priority inversions.

> 2) Is it feasible to rearrange the MM code so that we don't
> hold any locks while doing a TLB flush?  Or should I implement
> some sort of spin_only_semaphore?

Better to keep ia64 perversions in the IA64 code whenever possible and
lower risk for everyone else.

Alan

--
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/