lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jan]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: PROBLEM: in_atomic() misuse all over the place
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:18:50 +0100
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:

> > file: include/net/sock.h
> >
> > static inline gfp_t gfp_any(void)
> > {
> > return in_atomic() ? GFP_ATOMIC : GFP_KERNEL;
> > }
>
> That's typically for softirq vs non softirq, which is important
> for the network stack.
>

There's a bit of a problem here. If someone accidentally uses
gfp_any() inside a spinlock, it will do a sleeping allocation on
non-preempt kernels and will do an atomic allocation on preemptible
kernels, so we won't get to see the warning which would allow us to fix
the bug.

Would using irq_count() work? If so, that would fix this up.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-01-31 01:07    [W:0.061 / U:4.572 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site