Re: [ACPI] inappropriate use of in_atomic()

From: Jan Kasprzak
Date: Fri Mar 11 2005 - 04:14:56 EST

Andrew Morton wrote:
: in_atomic() is not a reliable indication of whether it is currently safe
: to call schedule().
: This is because the lockdepth beancounting which in_atomic() uses is only
: accumulated if CONFIG_PREEMPT=y. in_atomic() will return false inside
: spinlocks if CONFIG_PREEMPT=n.
: Consequently the use of in_atomic() in the below files is probably
: deadlocky if CONFIG_PREEMPT=n:
: drivers/acpi/osl.c

This may be the cause of

- I have recently verified that the problem described in bug #4150 disappears
when CONFIG_PREEMPT=y is used.


| Jan "Yenya" Kasprzak <kas at { - work | - private}> |
| GPG: ID 1024/D3498839 Fingerprint 0D99A7FB206605D7 8B35FCDE05B18A5E |
| Czech Linux Homepage: |
> Whatever the Java applications and desktop dances may lead to, Unix will <
> still be pushing the packets around for a quite a while. --Rob Pike <
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at