[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 09:30:18 +0100
From: Valentin Rothberg <valentinrothberg@...il.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: iss_storagedev@...com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block/cpqarray.c: remove IRQF_DISABLED flag
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Andrew Morton
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 13:32:55 +0100 Valentin Rothberg <Valentin.Rothberg@...6.fr> wrote:
>
>> The IRQF_DISABLED is a NOOP and scheduled to be removed. According to
>> Ingo Molnar (e58aa3d2d0cc01ad8d6f7f640a0670433f794922) running IRQ
>> handlers with interrupts enabled can cause stack overflows when the
>> interrupt line of the issuing device is still active.
>>
>
> I suggest you prepare a patch which removes IRQF_DISABLED entirely.
> Several drivers still use it and it is possible that they have been
> buggy for some time, so we should be careful to cc the relevant
> maintainers (they probably don't exist) so they can check out what's
> going on in their code.
That's a good idea. I sent some patches that remove the usage of
IRQF_DISABLED during the last days. Some of them have been applied,
others are pending. I may wait a few days to receive answers.
Shall I make a patch series (i.e., one patch removes the definition of
IRQF_DISABLED and then one patch per usage)?
Thank you,
Valentin
--
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