On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 05:29:54PM +, Al Viro wrote:
> And no, it doesn't save the irq state anywhere - both disable and enable
> are unconditional. schedule() always returns with irqs enabled.
PS: look at it that way: how would you expect a context switch to behave?
Suppose we blocked
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 05:29:54PM +, Al Viro wrote:
> And no, it doesn't save the irq state anywhere - both disable and enable
> are unconditional. schedule() always returns with irqs enabled.
PS: look at it that way: how would you expect a context switch to behave?
Suppose we blocked
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 02:32:28PM +0800, majun (F) wrote:
> Sorry,I made a wrong example for this problem.
> I want to say this interface may change the irq status after this function
> be called.
It can't - either it's called with irqs enabled, in which case it returns
the same way, or it's
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 02:32:28PM +0800, majun (F) wrote:
> Sorry,I made a wrong example for this problem.
> I want to say this interface may change the irq status after this function
> be called.
It can't - either it's called with irqs enabled, in which case it returns
the same way, or it's
在 2016/3/2 11:09, Al Viro 写道:
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 10:47:59AM +0800, MaJun wrote:
>> From: Ma Jun
>>
>> The spin_lock/unlock_irq interface is not safe when this function is called
>> at some case which need irq disabled.
>
>> For example:
>> spin_lock_irqsave()
在 2016/3/2 11:09, Al Viro 写道:
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 10:47:59AM +0800, MaJun wrote:
>> From: Ma Jun
>>
>> The spin_lock/unlock_irq interface is not safe when this function is called
>> at some case which need irq disabled.
>
>> For example:
>> spin_lock_irqsave()
>> |
>>
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 10:47:59AM +0800, MaJun wrote:
> From: Ma Jun
>
> The spin_lock/unlock_irq interface is not safe when this function is called
> at some case which need irq disabled.
> For example:
> spin_lock_irqsave()
> |
> request_irq() -->
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 10:47:59AM +0800, MaJun wrote:
> From: Ma Jun
>
> The spin_lock/unlock_irq interface is not safe when this function is called
> at some case which need irq disabled.
> For example:
> spin_lock_irqsave()
> |
> request_irq() --> proc_alloc_inum()
>
From: Ma Jun
The spin_lock/unlock_irq interface is not safe when this function is called
at some case which need irq disabled.
For example:
spin_lock_irqsave()
|
request_irq() --> proc_alloc_inum()
|
spin_unlock_irqrestore()
From: Ma Jun
The spin_lock/unlock_irq interface is not safe when this function is called
at some case which need irq disabled.
For example:
spin_lock_irqsave()
|
request_irq() --> proc_alloc_inum()
|
spin_unlock_irqrestore()
Reported-by: Fan Jinke
10 matches
Mail list logo