lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ACPICA: don't cond_resched() when irq_disabled or in_atomic
On Thu 2009-12-10 21:37:59, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> Pavel Machek ??????????:
> > On Thu 2009-12-10 20:58:45, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Pavel,
> >>
> >> Please elaborate... Your comments "ugly as hell" are too often to be
> >> specific...
> >> There is only one use of ACPI_PREEMPTION_POINT(), and it is in the
> >> ACPICA code,
> >> which we all agreed to keep OS independent, thus the need for #define.
> >> Do you see any other way to add preemption point without introducing
> >> Linux-specific
> >> code into ACPICA?
> >>
> >
> > I believe we want linux-specific code in acpica at this point.
> >
> >
> The point there we call cond_resched() in ACPICA is an interpreter parse
> loop. This parse loop may be executed from within atomic context and even
> with interrupts off. In this case, cond_resched() should not be called
> to not make
> might_sleep() guards angry.

Yes, so pass explicit argument to the interpretter, telling it what
kind of context it runs on. Similar to kmalloc's GFP_KERNEL
vs. GFP_ATOMIC.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-11 18:37    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site