From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: corbet@lwn.net (Jonathan Corbet),
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
stern@rowland.harvard.edu, mb@bu3sch.de, hmh@hmh.eng.br,
david-b@pacbell.net, rpurdie@rpsys.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu,
geert@linux-m68k.org
Subject: Re: use of preempt_count instead of in_atomic() at leds-gpio.c
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:39:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080325113942.06fe388b@hyperion.delvare> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vbq53mbh1.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 01:52:58 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> corbet@lwn.net (Jonathan Corbet) writes:
>
> > diff --git a/include/linux/hardirq.h b/include/linux/hardirq.h
> > index 4982998..63a7782 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/hardirq.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/hardirq.h
> > @@ -72,6 +72,13 @@
> > #define in_softirq() (softirq_count())
> > #define in_interrupt() (irq_count())
> >
> > +/*
> > + * Are we running in atomic context? WARNING: this macro cannot
> > + * always detect atomic context; in particular, it cannot know about
> > + * held spinlocks in non-preemptible kernels. Thus it should not be
> > + * used in the general case to determine whether sleeping is possible.
> > + * Do not use in_atomic() in driver code.
> > + */
> > #define in_atomic() ((preempt_count() & ~PREEMPT_ACTIVE) != 0)
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT
>
> Is it just me who feels this comment that says "in_atomic() is not a way
> to tell if we are in atomic reliably and cannot be used for such and such"
> very reader-unfriendly? Ok, maybe the macro is not reliable and is not
> meant to be used for the purpose its name seems to suggest (at least to a
> non-kernel person). An inevitable question is, then what is it good for?
> What's the right situation to use this macro?
>
> I guess an additional comment "even if this says no, you could still be in
> atomic, but if this says yes, then you definitely are in atomic and cannot
> sleep" may help unconfuse a clueless reader like myself.
Andrew explained that in_atomic() could deadlock if called in a
condition where it is unreliable (although I did not understand the
details). Documenting that a "yes" from in_atomic() can always be
trusted, would invite driver authors to still use it, when my
understanding is that they still shouldn't.
If drivers shouldn't use in_atomic() at all then I think that the
long-term solution is to move its definition out of <linux/hardirq.h>.
But of course this means fixing all the drivers that still use it first.
--
Jean Delvare
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-25 10:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-16 18:43 use of preempt_count instead of in_atomic() at leds-gpio.c Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-03-16 19:46 ` David Brownell
2008-03-18 7:14 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-18 19:06 ` David Brownell
2008-03-18 20:07 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-20 22:56 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-03-20 23:47 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-21 0:36 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-03-21 1:08 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-21 1:31 ` Alan Stern
2008-03-21 1:36 ` Michael Buesch
2008-03-21 2:27 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-21 3:07 ` Alan Stern
2008-03-21 3:17 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-21 9:53 ` Jean Delvare
2008-03-21 17:37 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-21 18:05 ` Alan Stern
2008-03-24 19:34 ` Jonathan Corbet
2008-03-24 19:42 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-24 19:53 ` Jonathan Corbet
2008-03-25 8:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-03-25 10:39 ` Jean Delvare [this message]
2008-03-25 13:44 ` Jonathan Corbet
2008-03-25 23:20 ` David Brownell
2008-03-26 14:28 ` Alan Stern
2008-03-26 16:17 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-03-26 16:46 ` Richard Purdie
2008-03-27 18:51 ` David Brownell
2008-03-21 15:11 ` Tetsuo Handa
2008-03-21 16:54 ` Stefan Richter
2008-03-21 17:02 ` Stefan Richter
2008-03-23 5:53 ` Tetsuo Handa
2008-03-21 13:47 ` Heiko Carstens
2008-03-21 16:54 ` Greg KH
2008-03-21 19:59 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-21 20:16 ` Michael Buesch
2008-03-21 20:20 ` Michael Buesch
2008-03-21 9:21 ` Stefan Richter
2008-03-21 9:27 ` Stefan Richter
2008-03-21 12:37 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-03-21 13:16 ` Stefan Richter
2008-03-22 11:29 ` Stefan Richter
2008-03-21 17:04 ` David Brownell
2008-03-21 0:56 ` Richard Purdie
2008-03-21 2:10 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
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=20080325113942.06fe388b@hyperion.delvare \
--to=khali@linux-fr.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=david-b@pacbell.net \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=hmh@hmh.eng.br \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mb@bu3sch.de \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rpurdie@rpsys.net \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/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