[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090211171622.GA13239@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 18:16:22 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] git pull request for tip/tracing/core
* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Feb 2009, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> >
> > On Wed, 11 Feb 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > > > Steven Rostedt (7):
> > > > > ring-buffer: add NMI protection for spinlocks
> > > > > nmi: add generic nmi tracking state
> > >
> > > hm, this commit breaks a number of non-x86 architectures the following way:
> > >
> > > In file included from /home/mingo/tip/include/linux/interrupt.h:12,
> > > from /home/mingo/tip/arch/ia64/include/asm/mca.h:16,
> > > from /home/mingo/tip/arch/ia64/kernel/asm-offsets.c:17:
> > > /home/mingo/tip/include/linux/hardirq.h:67:2: #error PREEMPT_ACTIVE too high!
> > > make[2]: *** [arch/ia64/kernel/asm-offsets.s] Error 1
>
> I just looked at alpha and arm, I'm now looking at ia64. And this could
> be an issue, since it has 14 bits for hard irqs.
>
> What would be the impact to make the preempt count a long?
Assembly code has to be audited i guess, whether it's treated as an int anywhere.
Should work i guess.
Ingo
--
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