[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090104111927.1bed8269@infradead.org>
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:19:27 -0800
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, fweisbec@...il.com,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Fastboot revisited: Asynchronous function calls
On Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:11:53 -0800 (PST)
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 4 Jan 2009, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> >
> > or we declare the irq probing stuff "rare" and just make THAT fully
> > serializing....
> > do a full synchronization before starting a probe
>
> Yes. That's entirely possible. However, have you verified that if an
> async thread does a synchronization, it doesn't deadlock?
an async thread can synchronize on its own cookie.
so yes if we make this a global serialize, we can't do irq autoprobing
in async context. If we can use PNP/etc for serial.. I don't think
that's a big deal.. nobody with sane hw would need to autoprobe ever.
--
Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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