[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080226133715.d9cd32e7.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:37:15 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@....de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.6.24-git: kmap_atomic() WARN_ON()
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 21:49:43 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> * Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> > > This is only being done to satisfy kmap_atomic's requirements, not
> > > libata's.
> > >
> > > I could add a "kmap lock" but that just seems silly.
> > >
> >
> > It's a bit sad to disable interupts across a memset (how big is it?)
> > just for the small proportion of cases which are accessing a highmem
> > page.
> >
> > What you could do is to add an `unsigned long *flags' arg to
> > ata_scsi_rbuf_get() and ata_scsi_rbuf_put(), and then, in
> > ata_scsi_rbuf_get() do
> >
> > if (PageHighmem(page))
> > local_irq_disable(*flags);
>
> it would be much nicer to attach the irq disabling to the object, not to
> some arbitrary place in the code.
>
> i.e. to introduce a kmap_atomic_irqsave(...,flags) and
> kunmap_atomic_irqrestore() API variant. _That_ then could be mapped by
> -rt to a non-irq disabling thing.
>
Sure. But iirc we haven't had a need for this before. Which is a bit odd.
--
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