Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:01 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: >> Add a preempt_enable() to flush_tlb_kernel_page() since -rt4 patch >> adds a preempt_disable but no preempt_enable(). >> >> Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Good catch. Applied. Thomas could you

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

Russell King wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 09:13:57AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: >> On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 10:22 +0100, Russell King wrote: >>> In which case shouldn't it be at the end of the function so it includes >>> the write buffer handling as well? >>> >>> However, I think I agree with

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 09:13 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > Note that my patch simply adds an enable to match the disable added by > the -rt patch. I'm not sure where the disable originally came from, but > there are disable/enable pairs scattered throughout tlbflush.h in the > -rt patch. > > If

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 09:13:57AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 10:22 +0100, Russell King wrote: > > In which case shouldn't it be at the end of the function so it includes > > the write buffer handling as well? > > > > However, I think I agree with Daniel on this one. I

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 10:22 +0100, Russell King wrote: > On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 04:41:36PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:25 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:01 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > > > > Add a preempt_enable() to flush_tlb_kernel_page()

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 04:41:36PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:25 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:01 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > > > Add a preempt_enable() to flush_tlb_kernel_page() since -rt4 patch > > > adds a preempt_disable but no

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 04:41:36PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:25 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:01 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: Add a preempt_enable() to flush_tlb_kernel_page() since -rt4 patch adds a preempt_disable but no preempt_enable().

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 10:22 +0100, Russell King wrote: On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 04:41:36PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:25 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:01 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: Add a preempt_enable() to flush_tlb_kernel_page() since -rt4

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 09:13:57AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 10:22 +0100, Russell King wrote: In which case shouldn't it be at the end of the function so it includes the write buffer handling as well? However, I think I agree with Daniel on this one. I don't see

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 09:13 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: Note that my patch simply adds an enable to match the disable added by the -rt patch. I'm not sure where the disable originally came from, but there are disable/enable pairs scattered throughout tlbflush.h in the -rt patch. If this

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

Russell King wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 09:13:57AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 10:22 +0100, Russell King wrote: In which case shouldn't it be at the end of the function so it includes the write buffer handling as well? However, I think I agree with Daniel on this

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

Thomas Gleixner wrote: On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:01 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: Add a preempt_enable() to flush_tlb_kernel_page() since -rt4 patch adds a preempt_disable but no preempt_enable(). Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Good catch. Applied. Thomas could you apply this

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:01 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > Add a preempt_enable() to flush_tlb_kernel_page() since -rt4 patch > adds a preempt_disable but no preempt_enable(). > > Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Good catch. Applied. Thanks, tglx - To unsubscribe from

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:41 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > > Individually, yes. But the point of the preempt_disable/enable is to > make the whole sequence atomic. I was under the impression that only one of those mcr lines is called per board type, the rest just compile away? Daniel - To

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:25 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:01 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > > Add a preempt_enable() to flush_tlb_kernel_page() since -rt4 patch > > adds a preempt_disable but no preempt_enable(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:01 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > Add a preempt_enable() to flush_tlb_kernel_page() since -rt4 patch > adds a preempt_disable but no preempt_enable(). > > Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > --- > include/asm-arm/tlbflush.h |1 + > 1 file changed, 1

[PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

Add a preempt_enable() to flush_tlb_kernel_page() since -rt4 patch adds a preempt_disable but no preempt_enable(). Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- include/asm-arm/tlbflush.h |1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) Index: linux-2.6.21/include/asm-arm/tlbflush.h

[PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

Add a preempt_enable() to flush_tlb_kernel_page() since -rt4 patch adds a preempt_disable but no preempt_enable(). Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- include/asm-arm/tlbflush.h |1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) Index: linux-2.6.21/include/asm-arm/tlbflush.h

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:01 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: Add a preempt_enable() to flush_tlb_kernel_page() since -rt4 patch adds a preempt_disable but no preempt_enable(). Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- include/asm-arm/tlbflush.h |1 + 1 file changed, 1

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:25 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:01 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: Add a preempt_enable() to flush_tlb_kernel_page() since -rt4 patch adds a preempt_disable but no preempt_enable(). Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:41 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: Individually, yes. But the point of the preempt_disable/enable is to make the whole sequence atomic. I was under the impression that only one of those mcr lines is called per board type, the rest just compile away? Daniel - To

Re: [PATCH -rt] ARM TLB flush fix: don't forget to re-enable preemption

On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 16:01 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: Add a preempt_enable() to flush_tlb_kernel_page() since -rt4 patch adds a preempt_disable but no preempt_enable(). Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Good catch. Applied. Thanks, tglx - To unsubscribe from this