From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: "Brown, Len" <len.brown@intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
johnstul@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@lists.osdl.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] sleeping function called from invalid context during resume
Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2006 02:30:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060708003003.GE1700@elf.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CFF307C98FEABE47A452B27C06B85BB6ECF8BD@hdsmsx411.amr.corp.intel.com>
Hi!
> >Lacking any other caller-passed indication, it would be much better for
> >acpi to look at irqs_disabled(). That's effectively a task-local,
> >cpu-local argument which was passed down to callees. It's hacky - it's
> >like the PF_foo flags. But it's heaps better than having all
> >the kernel fight over the state of a global.
>
> I didn't propose that kmalloc callers peek at system_state.
> I proposed that system_state be set properly on resume
> exactly like it is set on boot -- SYSTEM_RUNNING means
> we are up with interrupts enabled.
>
> Note that this issue is not specific to ACPI, any other code
> that calls kmalloc during resume will hit __might_sleep().
> This is taken care of by system_state in the case of boot
> and the callers don't know anything about it -- resume
> is the same case and should work the same way.
I'd agree with Andrew here -- lets not mess with system_state. It is
broken by design, anyway.
Part of code would prefer SYSTEM_BOOTING during resume (because we are
initializing the devices), but I'm pretty sure some other piece of
code will get confused by that.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-07-08 0:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-07-08 0:21 [BUG] sleeping function called from invalid context during resume Brown, Len
2006-07-08 0:30 ` Pavel Machek [this message]
2006-07-08 0:45 ` [linux-pm] " Alan Stern
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-07-10 5:48 Brown, Len
2006-07-10 15:51 [linux-pm] " Brown, Len
2006-07-10 16:01 ` Alan Stern
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060708003003.GE1700@elf.ucw.cz \
--to=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox