lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Sep]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Sleeping function called from illegal context...
    John Levon wrote:
    >
    > On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 08:51:30PM -0400, Robert Love wrote:
    >
    > > Note this has nothing to do with kernel preemption. IDE explicitly
    > > sleeps while purposely holding a lock.
    > >
    > > It is just we do not have the ability to measure atomicity w/o
    > > preemption enabled - e.g. the debugging only works when it is enabled.
    >
    > Would it be particularly difficult to separate this debug tool from the
    > feature ? Surely we could make it so that CONFIG_PREEMPT depends on
    > CONFIG_MIGHT_SLEEP or whatever, and just adds the actual ability to
    > reschedule.

    We need a standalone CONFIG_MIGHT_SLEEP. I sinfully hooked it
    to CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL (it's not obvious why CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL
    exists actually).

    So yes, you could make CONFIG_MIGHT_SLEEP mutually exclusive
    with CONFIG_OPROFILE. But that would make people look at you
    suspiciously.

    > I have a bit of a problem with __might_sleep because I call sleepable
    > stuff holding a spinlock (yes, it is justified, and yes, it is safe
    > afaics, at least with PREEMPT=n)

    I'm looking at you suspiciously. How come?
    -
    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 13:29    [W:2.813 / U:0.460 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site