Re: [patch] rt: res_counter fix, v2

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 15:46 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 15:28 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > > [   45.228589] hardirqs last disabled at (0): [<ffffffff8025449d>] copy_process+0x68d/0x1500
> > > > [   45.228602] softirqs last  enabled at (0): [<ffffffff8025449d>] copy_process+0x68d/0x1500
> > > 
> > > 
> > > The reason for which I wanted to send an irqsoff trace is that the above lines are false.
> > 
> > copy_process() has:
> > 
> > #endif
> > 	p->hardirq_enable_ip = 0;
> > 	p->hardirq_enable_event = 0;
> > 	p->hardirq_disable_ip = _THIS_IP_;
> > 	p->hardirq_disable_event = 0;
> > 	p->softirqs_enabled = 1;
> > 	p->softirq_enable_ip = _THIS_IP_;
> > 	p->softirq_enable_event = 0;
> > 	p->softirq_disable_ip = 0;
> > 	p->softirq_disable_event = 0;
> > 	p->hardirq_context = 0;
> > 	p->softirq_context = 0;
> > #endif
> > 
> > the sequence count of 0 basically tells you it hasn't been set yet.
> 
> maybe we should initialize it to -1 to make this more apparent?

I think the current state makes sense, it reflects the actual state of
copy_process.

--
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/