Re: [PATCH] Remove extra local_bh_disable/enable from archdo_softirq

[Martin Schwidefsky]

On Sun, 2006-06-25 at 22:13 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> At the moment, powerpc and s390 have their own versions of do_softirq
> which include local_bh_disable() and __local_bh_enable() calls.  They
> end up calling __do_softirq (in kernel/softirq.c) which also does
> local_bh_disable/enable.
> 
> Apparently the two levels of disable/enable trigger a warning from
> some validation code that Ingo is working on, and he would like to see
> the outer level removed.  But to do that, we have to move the
> account_system_vtime calls that are currently in the arch do_softirq()
> implementations for powerpc and s390 into the generic __do_softirq()
> (this is a no-op for other archs because account_system_vtime is
> defined to be an empty inline function on all other archs).  This
> patch does that.

Nod, Heiko stumbled over that one as well as he ported the lock
validator patch. Moving the account_system_vtime call is the correct
solution.
 
-- 
blue skies,
  Martin.

Martin Schwidefsky
Linux for zSeries Development & Services
IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.


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