![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On 12 Sep 2002, Robert Love wrote: > While this sounds like a great debugging check, it is not useful in > general since we surely have some bad code that calls schedule() with > locks held. Further, since the atomic accounting only includes locks if > CONFIG_PREEMPT is set, you only see this with kernel preemption enabled. it *is* a great debugging check, at zero added cost. Scheduling from an atomic region *is* a critical bug that can and will cause problems in 99% of the cases. Rather fix the asserts that got triggered instead of backing out useful debugging checks ... Ingo - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:22 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||