[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180721172120.kbdu4euc2wn4xzgf@linux-r8p5>
Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2018 10:21:20 -0700
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: jbaron@...mai.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 0/2] fs/epoll: loosen irq safety when possible
On Fri, 20 Jul 2018, Andrew Morton wrote:
>We could open-code it locally. Add a couple of
>WARN_ON_ONCE(irqs_disabled())? That might need re-benchmarking with
>Xen but surely just reading the thing isn't too expensive?
We could also pass on the responsibility to lockdep and just use
lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled(). But I guess that would be less effective
than to just open code it in epoll without lockdep -- note that over 80
places in the kernel do this.
Thanks,
Davidlohr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists