Re: poll-related "scheduling while atomic", 2.5.44-mm6

From: Paolo Ciarrocchi (ciarrocchi@linuxmail.org)
Date: Tue Oct 29 2002 - 17:38:56 EST

Next message: Hanna Linder: "Re: and nicer too - Re: [PATCH] epoll more scalable than poll"
Previous message: Martin Waitz: "Re: and nicer too - Re: [PATCH] epoll more scalable than poll"
Maybe in reply to: Matt Reppert: "poll-related "scheduling while atomic", 2.5.44-mm6"
Next in thread: Andrew Morton: "Re: poll-related "scheduling while atomic", 2.5.44-mm6"
Reply: Andrew Morton: "Re: poll-related "scheduling while atomic", 2.5.44-mm6"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

>> So my guess is somewhere between -mm5 and -mm6 we
>> screwed up the atomicity count.
>Mine too. I'll check it out, thanks.

The same here as well

>Do you have preemption enabled?

yes

Paolo

Powered by Outblaze - 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/

Next message: Hanna Linder: "Re: and nicer too - Re: [PATCH] epoll more scalable than poll"
Previous message: Martin Waitz: "Re: and nicer too - Re: [PATCH] epoll more scalable than poll"
Maybe in reply to: Matt Reppert: "poll-related "scheduling while atomic", 2.5.44-mm6"
Next in thread: Andrew Morton: "Re: poll-related "scheduling while atomic", 2.5.44-mm6"
Reply: Andrew Morton: "Re: poll-related "scheduling while atomic", 2.5.44-mm6"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 22:00:45 EST