Re: [git pull] core kernel fixes

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 8:20 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > The patch was tested with our standard tests so it's certainly good in
> > practice - but i havent specifically tried your testcase (maybe Thomas
> > has). Can you see any problem with the fix?
> 
> Well, what I can see is that the patch that was committed has some
> missing changes. In Daniel's patch:
> 
> -repeat:
> -	spin_lock(&pool_lock);
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&pool_lock, flags);
>  	if (obj_pool.first) {
>  		obj	    = hlist_entry(obj_pool.first, typeof(*obj), node);
> 
> The patch that was committed:
> 
> -repeat:
>         spin_lock(&pool_lock);
>         if (obj_pool.first) {
>                 obj         = hlist_entry(obj_pool.first, typeof(*obj), node);
> 
> Was it not necessary to make the pool lock irq-safe in this place?
> 
> For reference:
> 
> Daniel's patch: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/6/15/27
> Actual commit: http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=70c85057e0bde35eb56352a293ecb5d1641a0334;hp=e6100f23375c0c71ce595d04551fa6553b611918

alloc_object() is called with interrupts disabled from __debug_object_init()

Thanks,
	tglx
 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/