[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53C7F063.7030007@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 08:48:51 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
CC: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86-64, espfix: consider IRQs are off when initializing
On 07/17/2014 08:13 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> When going through our initialization code (init_espfix_ap() ) we need to
> keep in mind IRQs are off, and we need to handle it appropriately:
>
> - Do not allocate with __GFP_FS.
> - No point in using a mutex.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
I don't think this is safe. The whole point was that if we do
GFP_ATOMIC we have to accept failure, and if we have a spin lock then
sleeping is not permitted. It is unclear to me is sleeping is safe in
this context even so, so we may still have a problem, but calling
__get_free_page(GFP_ATOMIC) and then unconditionally use the results is
not right.
-hpa
--
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