Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261408AbVDNAm7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Apr 2005 20:42:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261410AbVDNAm7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Apr 2005 20:42:59 -0400 Received: from fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.35]:57772 "EHLO fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261408AbVDNAm6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Apr 2005 20:42:58 -0400 Message-ID: <425DBC76.60804@labs.fujitsu.com> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 09:42:30 +0900 From: tsuchiya yoshihiro User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041206) X-Accept-Language: ja, en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: yt@labs.fujitsu.com Subject: SLEEP_ON_BKLCHECK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 707 Lines: 17 Hi, In Fedora Core3, interruptible_sleep_on() checks if the system is lock_kernel()'ed by SLEEP_ON_BKLCHECK. Same thing is done in RedHatEL4. Also I found a patch including SLEEP_ON_BKLCHECK was posted before, but is not included in 2.6.11. Why SLEEP_ON_BKLCHECK checks lock_kernel ? Lock_kernel shoud be held during sleep_on_timeout? And I also wonder why 2.6.11 does not check it. Thank you, Please CC me because I am not subscribing this list. Yoshi Tsuchiya - 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/