Eric Paris пишет:
On Sat, 2009-08-22 at 00:12 +0400, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
Hi,
This should be handled by abe1dfab60e1839d115930286cb421f5a5b193f3.
And yet I'm getting it from linux-next today.
So you are apparently failing the in_atomic_preempt_off() test but
succeeding in your !irqs_disabled() test.
Something isn't right since I'm hitting it hundreds of times on boot.
-Eric
Ok, let's see if replacing irqs_disabled() to
in_atomic_preempt_off() helps...
Regards,
Alex.
diff --git a/include/acpi/platform/aclinux.h b/include/acpi/platform/aclinux.h
index fcb8e4b..23b262b 100644
--- a/include/acpi/platform/aclinux.h
+++ b/include/acpi/platform/aclinux.h
@@ -152,7 +152,7 @@ static inline void *acpi_os_acquire_object(acpi_cache_t * cache)
#define ACPI_PREEMPTION_POINT() \
do { \
- if (!irqs_disabled()) \
+ if (!in_atomic_preempt_off()) \
cond_resched(); \
} while (0)
