From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Subject: Re: scheduling while atomic acpi_idle_enter_bm Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 19:09:30 -0800 Message-ID: <43e72e890911021909ke760ee1sd68caa92f66d1727@mail.gmail.com> References: <43e72e890910271640n7fafc8edpc14143fcfca7df60@mail.gmail.com> <20091027165345.3237d3df@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: Received: from mail-iw0-f180.google.com ([209.85.223.180]:38471 "EHLO mail-iw0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757175AbZKCDJq (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2009 22:09:46 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Len Brown Cc: Arjan van de Ven , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 7:02 PM, Len Brown wrote: >> > I get this when modprobing some module I am working on. I figured it >> > was the module's fault but the EIP points to something else so I am >> > not sure. I get the following repeating about 4 times on 2.6.32-rc5: >> >> >> you can get this if your own code leaves interrupts disabled in a >> kernel thread and then lets the cpu go idle... > > Unclear. > > acpi_enter_idle_bm() assumes that it is entered with irqs enabled, > and so it we unconditionally disables IRQs. > > Then we unconditionally re-enable them. > > The problem seems to be that right after we enable them, > we find that they are actually disabled, perhaps as > a side-effect of SMM. > > Is your machine a Dell, per chance? Nope. > Please test the patches in this bug report: > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14101 In my case it was as Arjan pointed out and I've fixed it in my driver. Sorry for not reporting back and thanks for your review. Luis