[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <B85A65D85D7EB246BE421B3FB0FBB59301DE3B67A0@dbde02.ent.ti.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 14:48:09 +0530
From: "Dasgupta, Romit" <romit@...com>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
CC: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org"
<linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/1] PM: Thaws refrigerated and to be exited kernel
threads
> Really? I believe the "ktrhead_should_stop" is new rule, and code does
> not seem to follow it. Actually, for example audit does not seem to
> use kthread_should_stop() at all...
>
> ./kernel/rtmutex-tester.c-
> ./kernel/rtmutex-tester.c- /* Wait for the next
> command to be executed */
> ./kernel/rtmutex-tester.c- schedule();
> ./kernel/rtmutex-tester.c: try_to_freeze();
> ./kernel/rtmutex-tester.c-
> ./kernel/rtmutex-tester.c- if (signal_pending(current))
> ./kernel/rtmutex-tester.c- flush_signals(current);
> --
Not a new rule. For these threads you listed no one stops them by sending
'kthread_stop' so the problem does not arise! But for the threads that are
stopped by invoking kthread_stop they do check kthread_should_stop. --
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