This would be more appropriate:
--- 25/kernel/sched.c~a Sun Dec 29 13:53:24 2002
+++ 25-akpm/kernel/sched.c Sun Dec 29 13:54:27 2002
@@ -1264,7 +1264,14 @@ long interruptible_sleep_on_timeout(wait
void sleep_on(wait_queue_head_t *q)
{
+ static int count;
+
SLEEP_ON_VAR
+
+ if (count < 10 && !kernel_locked()) {
+ count++;
+ WARN_ON(1);
+ }
current->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
> > Weaning ext3 off lock_kernel()
> > is a large, delicate and thus-far undesigned body of work. I've been
> > working on other stuff and it is quite unlikely that ext3 locking will
> > be redesigned in the 2.5 timeframe.
>
> Then ext3 has to live with using depricated interfaces during 2.6,
> what's the point?
We shouldn't generate tons of bogus warnings for something which
everyone knows about anyway.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/