Re: [PATCH] misc. kernel preemption bits

[Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>]

On Thu, 2002-08-29 at 14:24, Andrew Morton wrote:

> Robert Love wrote:
> > 
> > ...
> >         - we have a debug check in preempt_schedule that, even
> >           on detecting a schedule with irqs disabled, still goes
> >           ahead and reschedules.  We should return. (me)
> > 
> 
> OK, but that warning will still come out of the mess in mm/slab.c.

Yah I saw your previous post.  There is also a report or two re oops on
poisoned memory with SLAB_DEBUG and preempt enabled - which should be
fixed by the above return but one report says it does not.

Anyhow, your new methods are fine... if they work, they work.

I am starting to get concerned over the number of routines we are having
to define.  It is getting complicated (i.e. the
inc_preempt_non_preempt() stuff).

Maybe keep these local to mm/slab.c ?

	Robert Love