* David Mosberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now, Ingo says that the order is reversed with his patch, i.e.,
> switch_mm() happens after switch_to(). That means flush_tlb_mm() may
> now see a current->active_mm which hasn't really been activated yet.
> That should be OK since it would just mean that we'd do an early (and
> duplicate) activate_context(). While it does not give me a warm and
> fuzzy feeling to have this inconsistent state be observable by
> interrupt-handlers (and, in particular, IPI-handlers), I don't see any
> problem with it off hand.
thanks for the analysis. I fundamentally dont have any fuzzy feeling
from having _any_ portion of the context-switch path nonatomic, but with
more complex hardware it's just not possible it seems.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
