in_atomic() & spin_lock / spin_unlock in different functions

From: Pavel Machek (pavel@ucw.cz)
Date: Sun Oct 13 2002 - 13:38:38 EST

Next message: Eric Blade: "Evolution and 2.5.x"
Previous message: Urban Widmark: "Re: 2.5.42 breaks Soundblaster OSS driver and smbfs modules"
Next in thread: Manfred Spraul: "Re: in_atomic() & spin_lock / spin_unlock in different functions"
Maybe reply: Manfred Spraul: "Re: in_atomic() & spin_lock / spin_unlock in different functions"
Reply: Robert Love: "Re: in_atomic() & spin_lock / spin_unlock in different functions"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi!

What is it that in_atomic counts? Obviously spinlocks and
get_cpu/put_cpu. Anything else?

Is there easy way to find out which spinlock causes "scheduling in
atomic" warning? [It happens a *lot* in swsusp].

I'm doing spin_lock_irqsave() then in another function
spin_unlock_irqrestore. Is that okay? If no, can it cause "scheduling
in atomic"?
Pavel

-- 
When do you have heart between your knees?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Eric Blade: "Evolution and 2.5.x"
Previous message: Urban Widmark: "Re: 2.5.42 breaks Soundblaster OSS driver and smbfs modules"
Next in thread: Manfred Spraul: "Re: in_atomic() & spin_lock / spin_unlock in different functions"
Maybe reply: Manfred Spraul: "Re: in_atomic() & spin_lock / spin_unlock in different functions"
Reply: Robert Love: "Re: in_atomic() & spin_lock / spin_unlock in different functions"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 15 2002 - 22:00:46 EST