Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Subject | Re: error : preempt_count 1 | From | Robert Love <> | Date | 14 May 2002 09:24:57 -0700 |
| |
On Tue, 2002-05-14 at 09:45, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> On 13 May 2002 14:18, Robert Love wrote: > > > Absolutely nothing bad. It is a debugging check to catch bad code that > > does funny things with locks. Ideally, every program should call unlock > > for each instance it called lock - balancing everything out and giving a > > preempt_count of zero. > > > Some code in the kernel, knowing it is shutting down, does not bother to > > drop any held locks and subsequently you see that message. > > > Since it is triggering false positives, I will remove it eventually. > > I'd say don't remove it, just omit the 'error:' part - this will > reduce panic mails on the subject. > > > For now it is incredibly useful for catching real problems. And the > > above, while harmless, could be fixed for "cleanliness" concerns.
Not a bad idea ;-)
For now this will hopefully curb the inquiries - I can still remove it later when I am confident that the core code is sane and if people still whine.
Thanks,
Robert Love
--- linux-2.5.15/kernel/exit.c Sun May 5 20:37:59 2002 +++ linux/kernel/exit.c Tue May 14 09:22:52 2002 @@ -526,7 +526,7 @@ del_timer_sync(&tsk->real_timer); if (unlikely(preempt_get_count())) - printk(KERN_ERR "error: %s[%d] exited with preempt_count %d\n", + printk(KERN_ERR "%s[%d] exited with preempt_count %d\n", current->comm, current->pid, preempt_get_count()); - 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/
| |