On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:32:24 -0500 Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> + unsigned long flags;
> >> +
> >> + local_irq_save(flags);
> >
> > hm, couldnt we attach the irq disabling to some spinlock, in a natural
> >
Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ local_irq_save(flags);
hm, couldnt we attach the irq disabling to some spinlock, in a natural
way? Explicit flags fiddling is a PITA once we do things like threaded
irq handlers, -rt, etc.
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Welcome to test this... (attached, not tested nor even compiled, really)
Works, but I agree with Ingo vs. the stand alone irq_en/disable.
Thanks,
tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a
* Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + local_irq_save(flags);
hm, couldnt we attach the irq disabling to some spinlock, in a natural
way? Explicit flags fiddling is a PITA once we do things like threaded
irq handlers, -rt, etc.
Ingo
--
To
* Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ local_irq_save(flags);
hm, couldnt we attach the irq disabling to some spinlock, in a natural
way? Explicit flags fiddling is a PITA once we do things like threaded
irq handlers, -rt, etc.
Ingo
--
To
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Welcome to test this... (attached, not tested nor even compiled, really)
Works, but I agree with Ingo vs. the stand alone irq_en/disable.
Thanks,
tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a
Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ local_irq_save(flags);
hm, couldnt we attach the irq disabling to some spinlock, in a natural
way? Explicit flags fiddling is a PITA once we do things like threaded
irq handlers, -rt, etc.
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:32:24 -0500 Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ local_irq_save(flags);
hm, couldnt we attach the irq disabling to some spinlock, in a natural
way? Explicit flags
Welcome to test this... (attached, not tested nor even compiled, really)
Jeff
diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
index 0562b0a..7b1f1ee 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
@@ -1694,12 +1694,17 @@ void
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 23:01:59 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:08:35 -0500 Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > There are plenty of drivers that do the same thing that ahci does, in
> > > terms
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:08:35 -0500 Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > There are plenty of drivers that do the same thing that ahci does, in
> > terms of interrupt handler locking... and I will definitely push back
> > on efforts to convert
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:08:35 -0500 Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bj__rn Steinbrink wrote:
> > On 2008.02.07 00:58:42 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >> current mainline triggers:
> >>
> >> WARNING: at
> >> /home/tglx/work/kernel/x86/linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c:52
> >>
On 2008.02.25 15:08:35 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Björn Steinbrink wrote:
>> Hm, do you have lockdep enabled? If not, does lockdep make this go away?
>> Because lockdep will set IRQF_DISABLED for all interrupt handlers, and
>> unless that flag is set, handle_IRQ_event will reenable interrupts
Björn Steinbrink wrote:
On 2008.02.07 00:58:42 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
current mainline triggers:
WARNING: at /home/tglx/work/kernel/x86/linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c:52
kmap_atomic_prot+0xe5/0x19b()
Modules linked in: ahci(+) sata_sil libata sd_mod scsi_mod raid1 ext3 jbd
On 2008.02.07 00:58:42 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> current mainline triggers:
>
> WARNING: at /home/tglx/work/kernel/x86/linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c:52
> kmap_atomic_prot+0xe5/0x19b()
> Modules linked in: ahci(+) sata_sil libata sd_mod scsi_mod raid1 ext3 jbd
> ehci_hcd ohci_hcd
On 2008.02.07 00:58:42 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
current mainline triggers:
WARNING: at /home/tglx/work/kernel/x86/linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c:52
kmap_atomic_prot+0xe5/0x19b()
Modules linked in: ahci(+) sata_sil libata sd_mod scsi_mod raid1 ext3 jbd
ehci_hcd ohci_hcd uhci_hcd
Björn Steinbrink wrote:
On 2008.02.07 00:58:42 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
current mainline triggers:
WARNING: at /home/tglx/work/kernel/x86/linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c:52
kmap_atomic_prot+0xe5/0x19b()
Modules linked in: ahci(+) sata_sil libata sd_mod scsi_mod raid1 ext3 jbd
On 2008.02.25 15:08:35 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Björn Steinbrink wrote:
Hm, do you have lockdep enabled? If not, does lockdep make this go away?
Because lockdep will set IRQF_DISABLED for all interrupt handlers, and
unless that flag is set, handle_IRQ_event will reenable interrupts while
the
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:08:35 -0500 Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bj__rn Steinbrink wrote:
On 2008.02.07 00:58:42 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
current mainline triggers:
WARNING: at
/home/tglx/work/kernel/x86/linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c:52
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:08:35 -0500 Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are plenty of drivers that do the same thing that ahci does, in
terms of interrupt handler locking... and I will definitely push back
on efforts to convert
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 23:01:59 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:08:35 -0500 Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are plenty of drivers that do the same thing that ahci does, in
terms of interrupt
Welcome to test this... (attached, not tested nor even compiled, really)
Jeff
diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
index 0562b0a..7b1f1ee 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
@@ -1694,12 +1694,17 @@ void
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> On Thursday, 7 of February 2008, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > current mainline triggers:
>
> Has the issue been fixed in the meantime?
Nope.
Just for reference: http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/14/38 looks
frighteningly similar.
Hi Thomas,
On Thursday, 7 of February 2008, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> current mainline triggers:
Has the issue been fixed in the meantime?
> WARNING: at /home/tglx/work/kernel/x86/linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c:52
> kmap_atomic_prot+0xe5/0x19b()
> Modules linked in: ahci(+) sata_sil libata
Hi Thomas,
On Thursday, 7 of February 2008, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
current mainline triggers:
Has the issue been fixed in the meantime?
WARNING: at /home/tglx/work/kernel/x86/linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c:52
kmap_atomic_prot+0xe5/0x19b()
Modules linked in: ahci(+) sata_sil libata
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Hi Thomas,
On Thursday, 7 of February 2008, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
current mainline triggers:
Has the issue been fixed in the meantime?
Nope.
Just for reference: http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/14/38 looks
frighteningly similar.
Thanks,
current mainline triggers:
WARNING: at /home/tglx/work/kernel/x86/linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c:52
kmap_atomic_prot+0xe5/0x19b()
Modules linked in: ahci(+) sata_sil libata sd_mod scsi_mod raid1 ext3 jbd
ehci_hcd ohci_hcd uhci_hcd
Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.24 #173
[]
current mainline triggers:
WARNING: at /home/tglx/work/kernel/x86/linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/highmem_32.c:52
kmap_atomic_prot+0xe5/0x19b()
Modules linked in: ahci(+) sata_sil libata sd_mod scsi_mod raid1 ext3 jbd
ehci_hcd ohci_hcd uhci_hcd
Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.24 #173
[c0126b60]
28 matches
Mail list logo