Subject: Re: boot time scheduling hile atomic

From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 09:28:43 +1100

On Wed, 2005-03-16 at 23:07 +0900, Takeharu KATO wrote:
> Hi Benjamin:
> 
> I can not figure out why my previous patch is more preferable than
> later one.
> Could you explain the reason of that please.

There may be other kernel bits calling syscall, it sounds saner to
always make sure we don't reschedule when in atomic (though it's dubious
that it's allowed to do syscalls in atomic regions, let's be safe
there).

In fact, we are thinking about consolidating the syscall return path and
the normal irq return path like we did on ppc64.

Ben.