linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/9] sched: add schedule_timeout

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 22 Mar 2016 13:56:26 -0400
From:	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] sched: add schedule_timeout_idle()

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 02:22:49PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 02:08:23PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 22-03-16 13:51:13, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > If that sounds like a more appropriate plan I won't object. I can simply
> > change my patch to do __set_current_state and schedule_timeout.
> 
> I dunno, I just think these wrappers are silly.

Adding out-of-line, exported wrappers for every single task state is
kind of silly. But it's still a common operation to wait in a certain
state, so having a single function for that makes sense. Kind of like
spin_lock_irqsave and friends.

Maybe this would be better?:

static inline long schedule_timeout_state(long timeout, long state)
{
	__set_current_state(state);
	return schedule_timeout(timeout);
}