2.6.12-rc2 in_atomic() picks up preempt_disable()

[Keith Owens]

2.6.12-rc2, with CONFIG_PREEMPT and CONFIG_PREEMPT_DEBUG.  The
in_atomic() macro thinks that preempt_disable() indicates an atomic
region so calls to __might_sleep() result in a stack trace.
preempt_count() returns 1, no soft or hard irqs are running and no
spinlocks are held.  It looks like there is no way to distinguish
between the use of preempt_disable() in the lock functions (atomic) and
preempt_disable() outside the lock functions (do nothing that might
migrate me).

-
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/