[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190701141037.GY3402@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 16:10:37 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/2] printk-rb: add a new printk ringbuffer
implementation
On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 12:39:35PM +0200, John Ogness wrote:
> Thanks. I overlooked that subtle detail. Can I assume NMIs do not exist
> on architectures that need to implement locking for cmpxchg()? Or did I
> just hit a major obstacle?
I think that is a fair assumption, I'm not aware of anybody having NMIs
_and_ 'broken' atomics.
Then again, we also have ARCH_HAVE_NMI_SAFE_CMPXCHG.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists