[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] cryptoapi: Fix sleeping
On Wed, 2003-08-13 at 17:21, Jeff Garzik wrote:

> Do you really want to schedule inside preempt_disable() ?

in_atomic() includes a check for preempt_disable() ... that is actually
all it checks (the preempt_count). So this fix prevents that.

This patch is interesting, though, because if right now we are
scheduling in the middle of per-CPU code there is a bug (regardless of
kernel preemption -- and with kernel preemption off, the in_atomic()
check might return false even though the code is accessing per-processor

So I think what we really want is to just never call this crypto_yield()
thing when in any sort of critical section, which includes any
per-processor data.

Robert Love

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:47    [W:0.081 / U:1.288 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site