| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 19:21:18 +0400 From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru> To: Anirban Sinha <kernel@...rban.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH]: correction: add a new wait_event_interruptible_timeout_modify helper On 09/26, Anirban Sinha wrote: > > arrghh!!! my bad. corrected patch is pasted below: The patch has numerous whitespace damages, please fix your mailer. But more importantly, it lacks the changelog. And this changelog should be very convincing, otherwise I'm afraid the patch will be ignored. It is not common to add the helper which has no users in kernel. > + * It also modifies the @timeout value so that if the sleep is > interrupted > + * by a signal, the caller can call this helper again with the updated > + * timeout. This is a bit misleading... If the task was interrupted, the next call will check "condition" and return immediately because of signal_pending(). We should return to the user-space before we can do interruptible sleep again. Why do you need this helper? Given that it is trivial to read jiffies before and after wait_event_interruptible_timeout(), it doesn't seem to buy too much. Oleg. -- 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