Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 28 Sep 2002 10:05:17 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: 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/
| |