Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible kernel

From: Nigel Gamble (nigel@nrg.org)
Date: Wed Mar 21 2001 - 13:18:38 EST


On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, David S. Miller wrote:
> Basically, anything which uses smp_processor_id() would need to
> be holding some lock so as to not get pre-empted.

Not necessarily. Another solution for the smp_processor_id() case is
to ensure that the task can only be scheduled on the current CPU for the
duration that the value of smp_processor_id() is used. Or, if the
critical region is very short, to disable interrupts on the local CPU.

Nigel Gamble nigel@nrg.org
Mountain View, CA, USA. http://www.nrg.org/

MontaVista Software nigel@mvista.com

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



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 23 2001 - 21:00:16 EST