Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:22:55 -0800 (PST) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: BUG or not? GFP_KERNEL with interrupts disabled. |
| |
On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, David S. Miller wrote: > > Let's codify this "in_atomic() || irqs_disabled()" test into a macro > that everyone can use to test sleepability, ok?
Well, I really don't want people to act dynamically differently depending on whether they can sleep or not. That makes static sanity-testing impossible. So I really think that the only really valid use of the above is on one single place: might_sleep().
Which right now doesn't do the "irqs_disabled()" test, but otherwise looks good. So the code should really just say
if (gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT) might_sleep();
and might_sleep() should be updated.
Anybody want to try that and see whether things break horribly?
Linus
- 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/
| |