From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757196Ab0DGGxs (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Apr 2010 02:53:48 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:51389 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757058Ab0DGGxm convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Apr 2010 02:53:42 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sparc64: Implement local_irq_save_nmi(). From: Peter Zijlstra To: David Miller Cc: mingo@elte.hu, acme@redhat.com, paulus@samba.org, efault@gmx.de, fweisbec@gmail.com, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20100406.163955.28809295.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20100406.163955.28809295.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 08:52:26 +0200 Message-ID: <1270623146.5109.532.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 16:39 -0700, David Miller wrote: > It disables up to PIL_NMI instead of just PIL_NORMAL_MAX. > > Signed-off-by: David S. Miller > > diff --git a/arch/sparc/include/asm/irqflags_64.h b/arch/sparc/include/asm/irqflags_64.h > index 8b49bf9..fa1e00e 100644 > --- a/arch/sparc/include/asm/irqflags_64.h > +++ b/arch/sparc/include/asm/irqflags_64.h > @@ -49,6 +49,16 @@ static inline void raw_local_irq_disable(void) > ); > } > > +static inline void raw_local_irq_disable_nmi(void) > +{ > + __asm__ __volatile__( > + "wrpr %0, %%pil" > + : /* no outputs */ > + : "i" (PIL_NMI) > + : "memory" > + ); > +} > + Isn't this wrong when used from !NMI context? Should this thing do something like: if (rdpr() < PIL_NORMAL_MAX) wrpr(PIL_NORMAL_MAX); so that it only disables IRQs, but doesn't enable NMIs.