Re: [PATCH RT 2/2 v4] preempt-rt/x86: Delay calling signals in int3

[Steven Rostedt]

On Sun, 2012-02-05 at 20:31 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Damn. Sorry for noise...
> 
> On 02/05, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > +int force_sig_info(int sig, struct siginfo *info, struct task_struct *t)
> > +{
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL
> > +	if (in_atomic()) {
> > +		if (WARN_ON_ONCE(t != current))
> 
> This is certainly wrong in upstream kernel. It does use force_
> this way although it shouldn't imho.

It's wrong in upstream even with the #ifdef define here?

> 
> But _probably_ this is fine for rt? We are going to take the mutex,
> we shouldn't do this in atomic context. But, once again, I do not
> really know what in_atomic() means in rt.

in_atomic() is the same in rt as in mainline. It should still work.

-- Steve


--
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/