Re: [RFC] I still see people using cli()

[Eric W. Biederman]

Victor Yodaiken <[e-mail]> writes:

> On Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 07:59:05PM +0530, BALBIR SINGH wrote:
> > BTW, that brings me to another issue, once the kernel becomes preemptibel,
> what
> 
> > are the locking issues? how are semaphores and spin-locks affected? Has
> anybody
> 
> > defined or come up with the rules/document yet?
> 
> IF the kernel becomes preemptible it will be so slow, so buggy, and so painful
> to maintain, that those issues won't matter.

The preemptible kernel work just takes the current SMP code, and
allows it to work on a single processor.  You are not interruptted if
you have a lock held.  This makes the number of cases in the kernel
simpler, and should improve maintenance as more people will be
affected by the SMP issues.

Right now there is a preemptible kernel patch being maintained
somewhere.  I haven't had a chance to look recently.  But the recent
threads on low latency mentioned it.

As for rules.  They are the usual SMP rules.  In earlier version there
was a requirement or that you used balanced constructs.

i.e.
spin_lock_irqsave
...
spin_unlock_irqrestore

and not.

spin_lock_irqsave
...
spin_unlock
..
restore_flags.

Eric