[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130814171216.GP23412@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 10:12:16 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] preempt_count rework
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 06:55:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 09:48:27AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > FWIW I removed the user_schedule in v2 because I don't need it anymore.
> > Feel free to pick it up from v1 though.
>
> Ah, I had a quick look through your v2 because I got a link into it from
> Ingo but didn't find it. I'll have to ask Google to locate this v1. I
Sorry, it's the thread starting with
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1541950
I also pushed the branch to git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ak/linux-misc.git
uaccess-opt311 is v1
uaccess-opt311-2 is v2 (without user_schedule)
> suppose that's what's wrong with my last patch. It directly does a call
> preempt_schedule -- which I had hoped would work due to its asmlinkage,
> but apparently there's more to it.
preempt_schedule does not preserve registers, so yes that would
explain a lot of problems.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
--
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