From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751823AbWBXD1j (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:27:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751825AbWBXD1j (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:27:39 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:46745 "EHLO mx2.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751823AbWBXD1i (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:27:38 -0500 From: Andi Kleen To: Alan Stern Subject: Re: [PATCH] The idle notifier chain should be atomic Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 04:27:26 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: sekharan@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200602240427.27441.ak@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday 24 February 2006 04:24, Alan Stern wrote: > In do_IRQ() there's a call to exit_idle(), which calls __exit_idle(), > which runs the idle_notifier call chain. Surely you're not saying that we > can do a down_read() in this pathway? No, but not because it's in an interrupt but because sleeping in the idle task is illegal. > And actually the chain's type doesn't seem to make much difference, since > at the moment there's nothing in the vanilla kernel that registers for the > idle_notifier chain. Will come eventually. -Andi