On Thu, 8 Apr 2004 17:07:44 -0700, David Mosberger <davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com> wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 13:19:37 +1000, Keith Owens <kaos@sgi.com> said: > > Keith> spin_lock_irqsave() on a contended lock leaves interrupts disabled > Keith> while waiting for the lock. If the interrupts were enabled before > Keith> spin_lock_irqsave then this has the nasty side effect of preventing > Keith> interrupt handling while waiting for the lock. Change the contention > Keith> path to enable interrupts if it is safe to do so, allowing the cpu to > Keith> process interrupts while waiting for the lock. > >Seems like a reasonable thing to me. I'm fine with the ia64-specific >bits, so I guess the only question is whether the linux/spinlock.h >bits will be accepted. Catch 22. The ia64 code cannot be changed without the change to linux/spinlock.h, that change cannot be justified without at least one architecture using it. David, could you send the change to Linus as an ia64 patch, other architectures can define _raw_spin_lock_flags if they want it. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlReceived on Fri Apr 9 03:43:21 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:25 EST