[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070422192646.GA15668@infradead.org>
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 20:26:46 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
"<Andrew Morton" <akpm@...l.org>, containers@...ts.osdl.org,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd_blkdevs: Convert to use the kthread API
On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 02:23:00PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-04-22 at 13:24 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > This is the full conversion I sent to Dave in April 2006, but never
> > got any feedback to:
>
> Sorry about that; I need prodding sometimes. I'll provide some now...
>
> Can you show me why the thread won't now miss a wakeup if it goes to
> sleep just as a new request is added to its queue?
Exactly the same thing that happened before. If you look at
wake_up_process it's just a tiny wrapper around try_to_wake_up.
And wake_up expands to __wake_up expaneds to __wake_up_common
which just walks the list of threads attached to the waitqueue
and then calls curr->func, which expands to try_to_wake_up.
So when your thread still is in running state nothing changes.
If your thread is not in running state it'll get woken by both
variants.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists