Linux-kernel mailing list archive 2000-26,: Re: owner field in `struct fs'

# Re: owner field in `struct fs'

Philipp Rumpf (prumpf@uzix.org)
Sat, 24 Jun 2000 13:33:36 -0700

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Michal Jaegermann: "Re: [patch-2.4.0-test2]Re: Linux-2.4.0-test2"
- Previous message: Alexander Viro: "Re: owner field in `struct fs'"

On Sat, Jun 24, 2000 at 09:25:33PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Here it is (it compiles both for UP and SMP, I can't test it on SMP though).
> >
> > --- linux/kernel/module.c Fri Jun 23 20:17:18 2000
> > +++ linux-prumpf/kernel/module.c Sat Jun 24 11:53:05 2000
>
> CPU1 CPU2
> spinlock(&card->lock)
> rmmod
> -FREEZE->
> spin on freeze

No. Freeze uses kernel threads not smp_call_function. So it would have
to be

CPU1 CPU2
rmmod spin_lock(&card->lock);
schedule();
spin on freeze

scheduling with a spinlock held is usually a bug.

Philipp

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

- Next message: Michal Jaegermann: "Re: [patch-2.4.0-test2]Re: Linux-2.4.0-test2"
- Previous message: Alexander Viro: "Re: owner field in `struct fs'"