On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 09:09:17AM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 12:06 AM, Jacob Meuser
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 06:47:01PM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
> >> instead of faking an assertwaitok check, let's use the real thing. this
> >> is almost the opposite of progr
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 12:06 AM, Jacob Meuser
wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 06:47:01PM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
>> instead of faking an assertwaitok check, let's use the real thing. this
>> is almost the opposite of progress on the whole bluetooth issue, but it
>> shortens the stack trace co
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 06:47:01PM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
> instead of faking an assertwaitok check, let's use the real thing. this
> is almost the opposite of progress on the whole bluetooth issue, but it
> shortens the stack trace considerably. the curproc check isn't terribly
> accurate,
instead of faking an assertwaitok check, let's use the real thing. this
is almost the opposite of progress on the whole bluetooth issue, but it
shortens the stack trace considerably. the curproc check isn't terribly
accurate, either, so it misses bugs.
i don't see any reason to avoid sleeping
