lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Dec]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: in_atomic doesn't count local_irq_disable?
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 19:03:36 +0530
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com> wrote:

> do_page_fault avoids calling this down_read if we are "in_atomic()"
> Isn't in_atomic supposed to count IRQs disabled case? If not
> then shouldn't do_page_fault also check for irqs_disabled()
> before calling down_read()?

in_atomic() doesn't actually return true if irqs are disabled.

hence "(in_atomic() || irqs_disabled())" in __might_sleep.

do_page_fault should have the same test...

Thanks,
Rusty.
--
there are those who do and those who hang on and you don't see too
many doers quoting their contemporaries. -- Larry McVoy
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:59    [W:0.140 / U:0.224 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site