Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756811Ab3IKSgA (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Sep 2013 14:36:00 -0400 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:17028 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755373Ab3IKSf7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Sep 2013 14:35:59 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=ddwCLAre c=1 sm=0 a=Sro2XwOs0tJUSHxCKfOySw==:17 a=Drc5e87SC40A:10 a=wRe-vSF1Ob0A:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=meVymXHHAAAA:8 a=KGjhK52YXX0A:10 a=kSsn7R9otuIA:10 a=GQmRT1DTiQAfSP_MaZ8A:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=Sro2XwOs0tJUSHxCKfOySw==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Authenticated-User: X-Originating-IP: 67.255.60.225 Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 14:35:57 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Mario Kleiner Cc: Peter Hurley , "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" , linux-rt-users , Thomas Gleixner , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Clark Williams , Dave Airlie , LKML Subject: Re: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context on 3.10.10-rt7 Message-ID: <20130911143557.14c1fe6a@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <5230B673.6090800@tuebingen.mpg.de> References: <20130911102809.GA31663@uudg.org> <20130911092623.42efd930@gandalf.local.home> <5230895B.5070400@hurleysoftware.com> <5230B673.6090800@tuebingen.mpg.de> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.2 (GTK+ 2.24.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 923 Lines: 20 On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:29:07 +0200 Mario Kleiner wrote: > That said, maybe preempt_disable is no longer the optimal choice there > and there's some better way to achieve good protection against > interruptions of that bit of code? My knowledge here is a bit rusty, and > the intel kms drivers and rt stuff has changed quite a bit. If you set your code to a higher priority than other tasks (and interrupts) than it wont be preempted there. Unless of course it blocks on a lock, but even then, priority inheritance will take place and it still should be rather quick. (unless the holder of the lock is doing that strange polling). -- Steve -- 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/