Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 1 Apr 2001 14:13:36 -0700 (PDT) | From | Nigel Gamble <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible kernel |
| |
On Sat, 31 Mar 2001, george anzinger wrote: > I think this should be: > if (p->has_cpu || p->state & TASK_PREEMPTED)) { > to catch tasks that were preempted with other states.
But the other states are all part of the state change that happens at a non-preemtive schedule() point, aren't they, so those tasks are already safe to access the data we are protecting.
Nigel Gamble nigel@nrg.org Mountain View, CA, USA. http://www.nrg.org/
MontaVista Software nigel@mvista.com
- 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/
| |