Re: timer_bh behaviour incorrect for 2.2.13?

Ingo Molnar (mingo@chiara.csoma.elte.hu)
Thu, 9 Dec 1999 18:04:48 +0100 (CET)


On Thu, 9 Dec 1999, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:

> timer interrupt could happen also in the other CPU a picosecond before
> we'll release the global_bh_count lock. So to fix all races a spinlock is
> necessary. [..]

i believe that is completely unnecessery - remember, if an IRQ happens on
another CPU, then _that_ CPU will call do_bottom_halves soon. So the only
thing that has to be ensured: the bh flags manipulated atomically.

-- mingo

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