From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262155AbVFRWMX (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Jun 2005 18:12:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262173AbVFRWMX (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Jun 2005 18:12:23 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:34495 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262155AbVFRWMP (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Jun 2005 18:12:15 -0400 Subject: Re: bad: scheduling while atomic!: how bad? From: Arjan van de Ven Reply-To: arjanv@redhat.com To: David L Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-0ry73zqHI9LIe75aUgYx" Organization: Red Hat, Inc. Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 18:10:01 -0400 Message-Id: <1119132601.5871.22.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-4) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --=-0ry73zqHI9LIe75aUgYx Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 2005-06-18 at 14:59 -0700, David L wrote: > I'm seeing the message: >=20 > bad: scheduling while atomic! >=20 > I see this dozens of times when I'm writing to a nand flash device using = a=20 > vendor-provided driver from Compulab in 2.6.8.1. Does this mean the driv= er=20 > has a bug or is incompatible with the preemptive configuration option? H= ow=20 > bad is "bad"? Should I turn of the preemption option, ignore the message= ,=20 > or what? can you post the sourcecode of the driver? it needs fixing... --=-0ry73zqHI9LIe75aUgYx Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCtJu4pv2rCoFn+CIRAqViAKCTue9M84lqDu4yp3wv2GCODRBeKgCggHAU v7e7HsYNN3ElE3vwkFWz2xI= =ZUT2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-0ry73zqHI9LIe75aUgYx--