[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080321123708.GE5586@khazad-dum.debian.net>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 09:37:08 -0300
From: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>
To: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>,
Richard Purdie <rpurdie@...ys.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
video4linux-list@...hat.com, lm-sensors@...sensors.org
Subject: Re: use of preempt_count instead of in_atomic() at leds-gpio.c
On Fri, 21 Mar 2008, Stefan Richter wrote:
> and eth1394 to deal with temporary lack of of tlabels. Alas I just
> recently received a report that eth1394's workaround is unsuccessful on
> non-preemptible uniprocessor kernels. I suspect the same issue exists
Which, I think, is exactly the config where in_atomic() can't be used to
mean "in_scheduleable_context()" ?
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists