* Mark Fasheh <[email protected]> wrote:
> Commit 2d7d253548cffdce80f4e03664686e9ccb1b0ed7 ("fix cond_resched() fix")
> introduced an 'expected_preempt_count' parameter to __resched_legal() to fix
> a bug where it was returning a false negative when called from
> cond_resched_lock() and preemption was enabled.
>
> Unfortunately this broke things for when preemption is disabled.
> preempt_count() will always return zero, thus failing the check against
> any value of expected_preempt_count not equal to zero. cond_resched_lock()
> for example, passes an expected_preempt_count value of 1.
>
> So fix the fix for the cond_resched() fix by skipping the check of
> preempt_count() against expected_preempt_count when preemption is disabled.
>
> Credit should go to Sunil Mushran for spotting the bug during testing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Fasheh <[email protected]>
well spotted. I'm wondering whether this piece of code has the highest
amount of fixes per line of code ratio in the whole kernel ...
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
Ingo
-
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]
