Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 4 Jan 2003 17:35:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 4 Jan 2003 17:35:33 -0500 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:7953 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 4 Jan 2003 17:35:31 -0500 Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 22:44:04 +0000 From: Matthew Wilcox To: "Grover, Andrew" Cc: Pavel Machek , ACPI mailing list , kernel list Subject: Re: [ACPI] acpi_os_queue_for_execution() Message-ID: <20030104224404.C19239@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from andrew.grover@intel.com on Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 11:00:04AM -0800 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1048 Lines: 22 On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 11:00:04AM -0800, Grover, Andrew wrote: > Are we allowed to block in a timer callback? One of the things > thermal_check does is call a control method, which in turn can be very > slow, sleep, etc., so I'd guess that's why the code tries to execute > things in its own thread. timers are run in bottom-half context. no sleeping allowed. if you're going to linux.conf.au, you'll want to attend my talk that deals with exactly this kind of thing ;-) i'll put the paper up on the web in a couple of weeks, after the proceedings are published. -- "It's not Hollywood. War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or victory, it is about death. I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies. Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject?" -- Robert Fisk - 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/