Re: lock_kernel: why it is empty?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Thomas..

> As explained in the kernel configuration help text for this option,
> voluntary preemption consists in adding explicit preemption points in
> the kernel. No kernel code will be preempted if it doesn't explicity
> calls might_sleep() (see http://lwn.net/Articles/93604/). So, it's up
> to you to not call might_sleep() when you're accessing shared data
> structures. That's why lock_kernel() is empty in voluntary preemption:
> it's simply up to you to not call might_sleep() at the wrong places.

What if the user selected CONFIG_SMP and at the same time choose
voluntary preemption model? does lock_kernel() still expand as void
function? I guess in SMP we still have to deal with concurrent
acquisition of lock....

regards,

Mulyadi

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send an email with
"unsubscribe kernelnewbies" to ecartis@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Please read the FAQ at http://kernelnewbies.org/FAQ


[Index of Archives]     [Newbies FAQ]     [Linux Kernel Mentors]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [IETF Annouce]     [Git]     [Networking]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ACPI]
  Powered by Linux