Avi Kivity wrote: > On 07/26/2009 05:38 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> Avi Kivity wrote: >> >>> On 07/26/2009 05:23 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> >>>>> btw, what does it fix? a debug warning? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I haven't seen anything in the wild, and I don't think it would raise a >>>> warning. All it should cause is a potential delay of some pending >>>> reschedule as preempt_enable will not fire under local_irq_disable. >>>> >>>> >>> Ah, okay, then it is a real fix. Preempt-correctness is important. >>> >>> (but won't local_irq_enable() reschedule?) >>> >> >> The last time I checked it was essentially a plain 'sti'. >> >> > > Presumably there's a reschedule interrupt queued; I think if you set the > reschedule bit you have to IPI the cpu running the task. > Yeah. But as we preempt_disable first, that one might have been processed already. Jan
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
