[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <13794.1255042710@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 23:58:30 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"hugh.dickins" <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] kmap_atomic_push
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> I can think of code that does a lot more than that, suppose you have
> both KM_USER[01], get an interrupt that takes KM_IRQ[01], take an NMI
> that takes KM_NMI.
But whilst the interrupt might want to use two slots, it's probably a bug for
it to want to access the mappings set up by whatever called KM_USER[01] - so
it can probably reuse those slots, provided it puts them back again.
Similarly for NMI taking KM_NMI - it probably shouldn't be attempting to
access the mappings set up by the normal mode or the interrupt mode - in which
case, why can't it reuse those slots?
> Maybe we can stack the SOFTIRQ ones in as well ;-)
Ditto.
David
--
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