[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130511013629.GE13340@somewhere>
Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 03:36:30 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86/sched/context_tracking: Call new
schedule_preempt_user() from entry_64.S
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 05:12:26PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> +/*
> + * This is a entry point to the scheduler() just before going
> + * back to user space. This is called with irqs disabled
> + * which prevents races with the CONTEXT_TRACKING updates.
> + */
> +asmlinkage void __sched schedule_preempt_user(void)
> +{
> + enum ctx_state prev_state;
> +
> + prev_state = exception_enter();
> +
> + local_irq_enable();
> + __schedule();
> + local_irq_disable();
> +
> + exception_exit(prev_state);
So since it's only ever called right before resuming to userspace and after
the user_exit() call from the end of the syscall/exception/irq code,
you can use user_enter()/user_exit() directly.
I'm also wondering if this assumption that irqs are disabled by the time
we do user preemption is x86-centric or not. May be we can wait for complains
from those who'll port it...
--
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