On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 12:17:37 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 20:10 +1000, Keith Owens wrote:
>> 2.6.12-rc2, with CONFIG_PREEMPT and CONFIG_PREEMPT_DEBUG. The
>> in_atomic() macro thinks that preempt_disable() indicates an atomic
>> region so calls to __might_sleep() result in a stack trace.
>
>but you're not allowed to schedule when preempt is disabled!
That sounds draconian. Where is that requirement stated?
A preempt-disabled region ought to have the same semantics
as in a CONFIG_PREEMPT=n kernel, and since schedule is Ok
in the latter case it should be Ok in the former too.
All that preempt_disable() should do is prevent involuntary
schedules. But the conditional schedules introduced by may-sleep
functions are _voluntary_, so there's no reason to forbid them.
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
