>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 08:42:53 +0200, Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Ingo> * 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.
Ingo> thanks for the analysis. I fundamentally dont have any fuzzy
Ingo> feeling from having _any_ portion of the context-switch path
Ingo> nonatomic, but with more complex hardware it's just not
Ingo> possible it seems.
No kidding! ;-)
I _think_ the change is OK. I'll need testing, of course.
Sure would be nice to have 2.7.xx...
Thanks,
--david
-
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/
