[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f68adf33-4a98-ac4b-fe07-ac4909eeefff@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2021 10:55:44 +0900
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
To: "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@...il.com>
Cc: syzbot+5f47a8cea6a12b77a876@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>,
David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>,
Bhaskar Chowdhury <unixbhaskar@...il.com>,
Igor Matheus Andrade Torrente <igormtorrente@...il.com>,
nick black <dankamongmen@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vt: Fix sleeping functions called from atomic context
On 2021/11/16 23:49, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> - if (in_interrupt())
> + if (!preemptible())
> return count;
preemptible() is "an unconditional 0" if CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT=n .
Is preemptible() really what we want? ;-)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists