[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080820210336.3e6ffd6d.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 21:03:36 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: sparse_irq need spin_lock in alloc
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:46:25 -0700 Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
> acording to Suresh Siddha, we should have spin_lock around it
>
> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/io_apic.c | 6 ++++++
> kernel/irq/handle.c | 7 +++++++
> 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+)
>
> Index: linux-2.6/kernel/irq/handle.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/irq/handle.c
> +++ linux-2.6/kernel/irq/handle.c
> @@ -166,6 +166,9 @@ struct irq_desc *irq_to_desc(unsigned in
> }
> return NULL;
> }
> +
> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(sparse_irq_lock);
> +
> struct irq_desc *irq_to_desc_alloc(unsigned int irq)
> {
> struct irq_desc *desc, *desc_pri;
> @@ -182,6 +185,7 @@ struct irq_desc *irq_to_desc_alloc(unsig
> count++;
> }
>
> + spin_lock(&sparse_irq_lock);
> /*
> * we run out of pre-allocate ones, allocate more
> */
> @@ -223,6 +227,9 @@ struct irq_desc *irq_to_desc_alloc(unsig
> else
> sparse_irqs = desc;
> desc->irq = irq;
> +
> + spin_unlock(&sparse_irq_lock);
> +
> printk(KERN_DEBUG "found new irq_desc for irq %d\n", desc->irq);
> #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_SPARSE_IRQ_DEBUG
> {
> Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/io_apic.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/kernel/io_apic.c
> +++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/io_apic.c
> @@ -210,6 +210,8 @@ static struct irq_cfg *irq_cfg(unsigned
> return NULL;
> }
>
> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(irq_cfg_lock);
> +
> static struct irq_cfg *irq_cfg_alloc(unsigned int irq)
> {
> struct irq_cfg *cfg, *cfg_pri;
> @@ -226,6 +228,7 @@ static struct irq_cfg *irq_cfg_alloc(uns
> count++;
> }
>
> + spin_lock(&irq_cfg_lock);
> if (!irq_cfgx_free) {
> unsigned long phys;
> unsigned long total_bytes;
> @@ -263,6 +266,9 @@ static struct irq_cfg *irq_cfg_alloc(uns
> else
> irq_cfgx = cfg;
> cfg->irq = irq;
> +
> + spin_unlock(&irq_cfg_lock);
> +
> printk(KERN_DEBUG "found new irq_cfg for irq %d\n", cfg->irq);
> #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_SPARSE_IRQ_DEBUG
> {
Each of these locks can be made local to the function in which they are
used (and hence they should be made local).
It would be nice to add a comment explaining what they are protecting,
unless that is obvious (I didn't look).
--
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