[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20121213150015.e497a585.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 15:00:15 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Li Zhong <zhong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] context_tracking: Add comments on interface and
internals
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 23:50:23 +0100
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> >> + * This call supports re-entrancy.
> >
> > Presumably the explanation for user_exit() applies here.
>
> Not sure what you mean here.
It's unclear what it means to say "user_enter() supports reentrancy".
I mean, zillions of kernel functions are surely reentrant - so what?
It appears that you had something in mind when pointing this out, but
what was it? The comment over user_exit() appears to tell us.
> > It's mainly this bit which makes me wonder why the code is in lib/. Is
> > there any conceivable prospect that any other subsystem will use this
> > code for anything?
>
> So that's because of that cputime accounting on dynticks CPUs which
> will need to know about user/kernel transitions. I'm preparing that
> for the 3.9 merge window.
Oh. That's really the entire reason for the patch and should have been
in the changelog!
--
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