On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 16:39 -0700, David Miller wrote:
quoted text
> It disables up to PIL_NMI instead of just PIL_NORMAL_MAX.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
> 
> 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.
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/