Re: [PATCH] ACPICA: don't cond_resched() when irq_disabled orin_atomic

[Pavel Machek]

On Thu 2009-12-10 21:37:59, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> Pavel Machek ??????????:
> > On Thu 2009-12-10 20:58:45, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> >   
> >> Hi Pavel,
> >>
> >> Please elaborate... Your comments "ugly as hell" are too often to be
> >> specific...
> >> There is only one use of ACPI_PREEMPTION_POINT(), and it is in the
> >> ACPICA code,
> >> which we all agreed to keep OS independent, thus the need for #define.
> >> Do you see any other way to add preemption point without introducing
> >> Linux-specific
> >> code into ACPICA?
> >>     
> >
> > I believe we want linux-specific code in acpica at this point.
> >
> >   
> The point there we call cond_resched() in ACPICA is an interpreter parse
> loop. This parse loop may be executed from within atomic context and even
> with interrupts off. In this case, cond_resched() should not be called
> to not make
> might_sleep() guards angry.

Yes, so pass explicit argument to the interpretter, telling it what
kind of context it runs on. Similar to kmalloc's GFP_KERNEL
vs. GFP_ATOMIC.
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/