On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 16:39 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> It disables up to PIL_NMI instead of just PIL_NORMAL_MAX.
>
> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> diff --git a/arch/sparc/include/asm/irqflags_64.h b/arch/sparc/include/asm/irqflags_64.h
> index 8b49bf9..fa1e00e 100644
> --- a/arch/sparc/include/asm/irqflags_64.h
> +++ b/arch/sparc/include/asm/irqflags_64.h
> @@ -49,6 +49,16 @@ static inline void raw_local_irq_disable(void)
> );
> }
>
> +static inline void raw_local_irq_disable_nmi(void)
> +{
> + __asm__ __volatile__(
> + "wrpr %0, %%pil"
> + : /* no outputs */
> + : "i" (PIL_NMI)
> + : "memory"
> + );
> +}
> +
Isn't this wrong when used from !NMI context?
Should this thing do something like:
if (rdpr() < PIL_NORMAL_MAX)
wrpr(PIL_NORMAL_MAX);
so that it only disables IRQs, but doesn't enable NMIs.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
