Re: [PATCH] BUG(): sched.c: Line 944

From: Robert Love (
Date: Tue Sep 17 2002 - 03:59:51 EST

On Tue, 2002-09-17 at 04:12, Robert Love wrote:

> I implemented exactly what you detailed, with one change: we need to
> check kernel_locked() before setting lock_depth because it is valid to
> exit() while holding the BKL. Aside from kernel code that does it
> intentionally, crashed code (e.g. modules) would have the same problem.

fsck, this is non-ending... obviously, this is insufficient:
preempt_count will equal two if the BKL was previously held and
in_atomic() will trip.

This should work:

        if (likely(!kernel_locked())
                tsk->lock_depth = -2;
        else {
                /* compensate for BKL; we still cannot preempt */

look sane?

Now, remind me why this is all worth it...

        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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 23 2002 - 22:00:18 EST