[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20060924115646.6b5b6482.akpm@osdl.org>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 11:56:46 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To: dipankar@...ibm.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Paul E McKenney <paulmck@...ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [-mm PATCH] RCU: debug sleep check
On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 00:05:09 +0530
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com> wrote:
> Add a debug check for rcu read-side critical section code calling
> a function that might sleep which is illegal. The check is enabled only
> if CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK_SLEEP is set.
>
Does this actually change anything? rcu_read_lock is preempt_disable(), and
might_sleep() already triggers if called inside preempt_disable().
> -#define rcu_read_lock() __rcu_read_lock()
> +#define rcu_read_lock() \
> + do { \
> + rcu_add_read_count(); \
> + __rcu_read_lock(); \
I don't have any __rcu_read_lock(). I guess this is against your
to-be-resent RCU patches?
> +DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, rcu_read_count);
Can have static scope.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists