| To: | torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: BUG or not? GFP_KERNEL with interrupts disabled. |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:55:37 -0800 (PST) |
| Cc: | shmulik.hen@xxxxxxxxx, dane@xxxxxxxxxx, bonding-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, bonding-announce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mingo@xxxxxxxxxx, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303270917290.29072-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20030327.054357.17283294.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303270917290.29072-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:22:29 -0800 (PST)
I do agree that we should obviously not run bottom halves with
interrupts disabled
Ok, so can we add a:
if (irqs_disabled())
BUG();
check to do_softirq()?
I'll address the rest of your email in a bit.
|
| Previous by Date: | 300 Modelos de Cartas comerciais, avisos, convites, propostas, etc., Redação Comercial |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: BUG or not? GFP_KERNEL with interrupts disabled., Linus Torvalds |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: BUG or not? GFP_KERNEL with interrupts disabled., Linus Torvalds |
| Next by Thread: | Re: BUG or not? GFP_KERNEL with interrupts disabled., Linus Torvalds |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |