-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
fix idle (arch, acpi and apm) and lockdep
OK, so 25-mm1 gave a lockdep error which made me look into this. The first thing that I noticed was the horrible mess; the second thing I saw was hacks like: 71e93d1 The problem is that arch idle routines are somewhat inconsitent with their IRQ state handling and instead of fixing _that_, we go paper over the problem. So the thing I've tried to do is set a standard for idle routines and fix them all up to adhere to that. So the rules are: idle routines are entered with IRQs disabled idle routines will exit with IRQs enabled Nearly all already did this in one form or another. Merge the 32 and 64 bit bits so they no longer have different bugs. As for the actual lockdep warning; __sti_mwait() did a plainly un-annotated irq-enable. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Tested-by: Bob Copeland <me@bobcopeland.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
- Loading branch information
Peter Zijlstra
authored and
Ingo Molnar
committed
Apr 26, 2008
1 parent
c3bf9bc
commit 7f424a8
Showing
6 changed files
with
137 additions
and
244 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.