Re: bad: scheduling while atomic!

[Jörn Engel]

On Sun, 15 June 2003 14:29:50 +0100, Russell King wrote:
> 
> This instance seems to be caused by the following code in
> drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c:
> 
>          while (!tr->blkcore_priv->exiting) {
>                  spin_lock_irq(rq->queue_lock);
>  ...
>                  spin_unlock_irq(rq->queue_lock);
>  ...
>                  spin_lock_irq(rq->queue_lock);
>  ...
>          }
> 
> It would be useful if we could balance the spin_locks with the
> spin_unlocks. 8)

How about this mindless guess?

Jörn

-- 
It's just what we asked for, but not what we want!
-- anonymous

--- linux-2.5.71/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c~mtd_spinlocks	2003-06-15 16:05:05.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.5.71/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c	2003-06-15 16:19:43.000000000 +0200
@@ -93,14 +93,13 @@
 	recalc_sigpending();
 	spin_unlock_irq(&current->sighand->siglock);
 
+	spin_lock_irq(rq->queue_lock);
 	while (!tr->blkcore_priv->exiting) {
 		struct request *req;
 		struct mtd_blktrans_dev *dev;
 		int res = 0;
 		DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, current);
 
-		spin_lock_irq(rq->queue_lock);
-
 		req = elv_next_request(rq);
 
 		if (!req) {
@@ -112,6 +111,7 @@
 			schedule();
 			remove_wait_queue(&tr->blkcore_priv->thread_wq, &wait);
 
+			spin_lock_irq(rq->queue_lock);
 			continue;
 		}