Re: 2.6.12-rc2 in_atomic() picks up preempt_disable()

[Mikael Pettersson]

On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 12:17:37 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 20:10 +1000, Keith Owens wrote:
>> 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.
>
>but you're not allowed to schedule when preempt is disabled!

That sounds draconian. Where is that requirement stated?

A preempt-disabled region ought to have the same semantics
as in a CONFIG_PREEMPT=n kernel, and since schedule is Ok
in the latter case it should be Ok in the former too.

All that preempt_disable() should do is prevent involuntary
schedules. But the conditional schedules introduced by may-sleep
functions are _voluntary_, so there's no reason to forbid them.
-
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/