On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 02:48 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > On 03.05.16 at 23:46, <dario.faggi...@citrix.com> wrote: > > In fact, interrupts are already disabled when calling > > the hook from schedule_cpu_switch(), and hence using > > anything different than just spin_lock() is wrong (and > > ASSERT()-s in debug builds) or unnecessary. > Well, this is a little too broad a statement: spin_lock_irqsave() > would be quite fine in this situation. > That would be covered by the "or unnecessary" part.
As in "spin_lock_irq() is wrong and spin_lock_irqsave() is unnecessary". > > > > Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggi...@citrix.com> > Actual code change > Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> > Thanks and Regards, Dario -- <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
