[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150513093812.65fdac96@thinkpad-w530>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 09:38:12 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <dahi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
yang.shi@...driver.com, benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com,
schwidefsky@...ibm.com, borntraeger@...ibm.com, mst@...hat.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, David.Laight@...LAB.COM, hughd@...gle.com,
hocko@...e.cz, ralf@...ux-mips.org, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
linux@....linux.org.uk, airlied@...ux.ie, daniel.vetter@...el.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
peterz@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 11/15] arm/futex: UP futex_atomic_op_inuser() relies
on disabled preemption
> * David Hildenbrand | 2015-05-11 17:52:16 [+0200]:
>
> >The !CONFIG_SMP implementation of futex_atomic_op_inuser() seems to rely
> >on disabled preemption to guarantee mutual exclusion.
>
> Yes, this is what the code looks like. It is more the requirement for
> ldrex/strex opcodes which are ARMv6+ and so is SMP support (here).
> Documentation wise you could replace CONFIG_SMP by
> __LINUX_ARM_ARCH__ >= 6
> in a later patch if you like. This would be more in-sync with
> arch/arm/include/asm/cmpxchg.h :)
>
> Sebastian
Thanks, I'll include it in the next version.
So I assume the cleanest thing to do would be:
#if __LINUX_ARM_ARCH__ < 6
preempt_disable();
#endif
David
--
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