On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Alan Stern <[email protected]>
> Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 16:57:30 -0500 (EST)
>
> > On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> >
> > > A notifier callee should not be sleeping, if anything it should be putting
> > > its work onto a workqueue and completing it when it gets scheduled if it
> > > has to do something that blocks.
> >
> > Sez who? If it's not documented in the kernel source, I don't believe
> > it.
>
> Many notifiers even get run from software interrupt context,
> making sleeping illegal.
>
> For example, IPV6 addresses can get added/removed from a device
> in response to packets, and these operations trigger the
> inet6addr_chain notifier in net/ipv6/addrconf.c
>
> So sleeping in a notifier is indeed illegal.
Correction: sleeping in an atomic notifier (like inet6addr_chain) callout
is illegal.
But there are plenty of notifier chains that are always invoked in process
context and where the callout routines may indeed block.
Alan Stern
-
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]
