Re: [PATCH] atomic highmem kmap page pinning

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Mon, 9 Mar 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:

> On Sat, 07 Mar 2009 17:42:44 -0500 (EST)
> Nicolas Pitre <nico@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Discussion about this patch is settling, so I'd like to know if there 
> > are more comments, or if official ACKs could be provided.  If people 
> > agree I'd like to carry this patch in my ARM highmem patch series since 
> > a couple things depend on this.
> > 
> > Andrew: You seemed OK with the original one.  Does this one pass your 
> > grottiness test?
> > 
> > Anyone else?
> 
> OK by me.

Thanks.

> > +/*
> > + * Most architectures have no use for kmap_high_get(), so let's abstract
> > + * the disabling of IRQ out of the locking in that case to save on a
> > + * potential useless overhead.
> > + */
> > +#ifdef ARCH_NEEDS_KMAP_HIGH_GET
> > +#define spin_lock_kmap()             spin_lock_irq(&kmap_lock)
> > +#define spin_unlock_kmap()           spin_unlock_irq(&kmap_lock)
> > +#define spin_lock_kmap_any(flags)    spin_lock_irqsave(&kmap_lock, flags)
> > +#define spin_unlock_kmap_any(flags)  spin_unlock_irqrestore(&kmap_lock, flags)
> > +#else
> > +#define spin_lock_kmap()             spin_lock(&kmap_lock)
> > +#define spin_unlock_kmap()           spin_unlock(&kmap_lock)
> > +#define spin_lock_kmap_any(flags)    \
> > +	do { spin_lock(&kmap_lock); (void)(flags); } while (0)
> > +#define spin_unlock_kmap_any(flags)  \
> > +	do { spin_unlock(&kmap_lock); (void)(flags); } while (0)
> > +#endif
> 
> It's a little bit misleading to discover that a "function" called
> spin_lock_kmap() secretly does an irq_disable().  Perhaps just remove
> the "spin_" from all these identifiers?

OK, done.


Nicolas
--
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/