On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 10:01 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > it can be bad for the idle task to hold the BKL and to have preemption > enabled - in such a situation the scheduler will get confused if an > interrupt triggers a forced preemption in that small window. But it's > not necessary to keep IRQs disabled after the BKL has been dropped. In > fact i think IRQ-disabling doesnt have to be done at all, the patch > below ought to solve this scenario equally well, and should solve the > PPC side-effects too. > > Tested ontop of 2.6.11-rc2 on x86 PREEMPT+SMP and PREEMPT+!SMP (which > IIRC were the config variants that triggered the original problem), on > an SMP and on a UP system.
Excellent, thanks. Ben. - 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/
