>... a similar fix needs to be made in
drivers/acpi/osl.c:acpi_os_wait_semaphore().
>If interrupts are disabled the timeout argument should be set to 0, so
that the
>routine will call down_trylock() instead of down() or
schedule_timeout_interruptible().
We used to have a hack in acpi_os_wait_semaphore():
if (in_atomic())
timeout = 0;
But we deleted it upon ACPICA 20060608 when the
ACPICA locks that were used at interrupt-time were
converted to be Linux spin-locks.
Now it is still conceivable that during resume before interrutps are
re-enabled,
the PCI interrupt link devices run AML and go to acquire an AML mutex
with
a timeout. However, we are single threaded at that point, so it isn't
possible for them to acquire the mutex -- timeout or not.
I don't like the looks of the "workaround" above -- it makes the code
confusing.
I'd be open to putting a BUG_ON() in the sleep case if interrupts are
not enabled.
Is there another case that you can think of?
-Len
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
