Re: Debugging Thinkpad T430s occasional suspend failure.
From: Frederic Weisbecker
Date: Sun Feb 17 2013 - 13:17:16 EST
2013/2/17 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> preempt_value_in_interrupt() looks buggy in your patch: it makes
>> invoke_softirq() returning if (val & HARDIRQ_MASK). But that's always
>> true since you have moved further the sub_preempt_count(IRQ_EXIT)
> No, that's not it. The value hasn't been written back yet, but it already did:
> + int offset = IRQ_EXIT_OFFSET;
> + int count = preempt_count() - offset;
> so the 'count' has the IRQ_EXIT_OFFSET already subtracted. So no,
> HARDIRQ_MASK is *not* always set.
Ah right. I was confused.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/