[repost with all folks CCed]

On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 9:20 PM, Gregory Haskins
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  Are you saying that the modified logic that I introduced is broken?  Or
>  that the original use of the might_sleep() annotation inside this
>  function is broken?

It's probably safe to use, but it's not what its original purpose was
and you should use another function/macro. This is an annotation issue
and your use of it is inconsistent with how it's used in voluntary
preempt. I mentioned it before in a previous post. Folks will correct
me if I'm wrong but you should use another macro or function.

bill
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to